User talk:Amalthea/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Adminship

Hi there. Seeing you around quite often, I wondered, have you ever considered adminship and if so, why haven't you requested it yet? Regards SoWhy 14:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I'm flattered that you think I might be suitable candidate. :)
I have certainly considered it, but couldn't push myself to actually go ahead and do it so far. I think I could be more useful with the extra buttons, but am a bit worried about going through the RfA. Being questioned or attacked by vandals, or by fellow editors for things that I've actually done wrong is one thing. Being questioned or attacked grilled in an RfA by a quorum of editors I respect is not something I'm looking forward to, in particular because I'm an even more useless content creator than Aervanath or you are, and I've read your RfAs (no insult intended, but you said so yourselves:)).
Cheers, Amalthea 17:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Content creation is important, but I think most people agree that we need WikiGnome admins as well (see the current RfA of Wehwalt, a pure content creator which gets opposes because of that). There are always people who will oppose because the candidate has a different philosophy than they have. And hey, I passed my RfA with ~90% in support and most of the opposes were about that userbox thingie and only 5-6 were about me not being a great content creator. So I'd say if that's your only concern, you'll do fine.

Your thoughts are mine, that's why I asked. I, too, think that you could be more useful with the extra buttons and it shouldn't be a big deal to get them.

But it's your (wiki-)life of course so I understand if you do not want to face the grilling but if you ever consider it, leave me a note and I'll help you as much as I can (or you can think about admin coaching to get you RfA-ready although I personally never thought it something you need). Have a nice day :-) SoWhy 17:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I think I will get back to you with that sooner or later, but I'll give myself more time till I try. Definitely not this year. And I'm not going to do any coaching, if I'll ever get interested in areas where I don't feel confident I'll know what to read, who to ask and who to watch, and to stay away until I do feel confident.
Again, though, thanks for your nice words, I really appreciate it! Cheers, Amalthea 18:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Amathea, I've actually been reviewing your edits for the past hour or two with the same thought in mind, why aren't you an admin? You have a great demeanor and a clean talk page. I'm impressed that you leave a lot of the criticism on your page, but it still doesn't look bad. Everything I see I like. That being said, I think you are wise not to run for admin right now. I think you need to do a little with content building---especially in the current mood of the RFA process. Wehwalt's RfA is probably going to fail and Aevernanth barely passed. Right now content building is at a premium... That being said, if you were to work on content building... and it doesn't take much... I would be honored to nom ya. Heck, I would be willing to consider it without the content building, but you'd have to convince me that you were up for a tough RfA---and based upon your comments above, I don't think you are. I think you have all of the tool necessary to be an admin, you just haven't checked the "box" that says article builder.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I am glad I am not the only one who thought that. But by the time I posted here, Wehwalt's RfA had only 3 opposes, now there are 12. But I think it will pass and if not, it's just a proof that content builders fail as well. Balloonman is correct of course, a bit of content building does not hurt much. I created at most 100 articles in more than four years[1] and half of them at least are now gone, merged or deleted (as I created many episode articles, which is not liked anymore). So pick something where you miss content and add a bit of content, it's not hard and sometimes it's fun ;-)

If you look at Wehwalt's or my RfA, you will notice that most opposes are about things other than too little or too much content building, so I still think you can pass RfA at the moment. But Balloonman has more experience than me so I will acknowledge that he might be correct. Anyway, the point is still correct - you would make a fine admin and whenever you decide to run, I'd be happy to co-nominate you. :-) SoWhy 11:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the community is very much into the notion of having a few articles under one's belt... especially right now. It is a notion that I typically agree with, but am willing to overlook on occassion. But when it comes to vandal fighters, it is hard to overlook. Vandal fighters/CSD'ers are the area where the most harm can be done, thus there has to be some subsinative article building. That's a position that I typically agree with, sometimes you can make exceptions (aeveranth for example) but that barely passed and I suspect that I used up a fair amount of my capital in getting that one pushed through.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 14:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I really appreciate it, Balloonman! I knew that I'd have to approach you at some point since you are one of the more outspoken critics of my kind of editor, so it's me who is honored that you did so on your own. Thank you.
And thank you, SoWhy, for your offer, too. :)
A tough RfA, Balloonman, wouldn't drive me away from Wikipedia if that's what you're worried about. It's just, as I said, not something I'm looking forward to, when I fully expect opposition questioning my constructivity or my empathy with content builders by editors I resepect. And you were actually at the top of the list of editors I had in mind there. :)
I fully understand that RfA likes to see more firsthand creation of content than what I can offer. I'm not even excluding myself there; someone who works in the deletion areas should show that they are still here to work constructively, even though this project needs maintainers just as much as builders at this point.
I would like to think that my edits, in a way, show that already, even though I can't point to one particular article. E.g., I recently helped editors Bonnie Khan and DebbieFeldmanJones for a while with their first articles (on their talk pages and above). All I've done is trivial compared to what's expected though: plain content. I can try and create an article from scratch (no promises at this point), but I won't be doing it to tick any boxes, but rather alleviate a concern that I might have with myself in an RfA. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 20:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Part of the fun/challenge of building the encyclopedia is that others will come along and bombastardize your creations. They will add content and make changes that you don't like. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. They will add tags that you disagree with and maybe even criticize the wisdom of the person making the article. But all of that goes towards what people at RfA are looking for. My advice: 1) create articles from scratch and get them on as a DYK and to GA status if possible. 2) Take an existing article/stub, and help improve it. One of my coachees showed that he wasn't the typical CSD'er. He would perform CSD/NPP work, but whenever he saw an article that he thought had promise, he would stop his CSD/NPP work and work on the article. He'd add links/references. He'd increase the bulk of the article and prove it worthy of keeping. This often landed him at AFD because the article would be tagged for deletion while he was working on it. But it showed that he wasn't the stereotypical CSD'er and it gave him a body of work to show, "See I do know what it feels like." The other nice thing is that if you save articles from CSD, then you can submit them to DYK. If you think you'd have a problem coming up with ideas, this might be a valid way to find ideas. Get some experience in building articles and your RfA should be fine.

Amathea, I do think you'd be a great admin... and we need more admins like you in the CSD arena. I do hope that you take these thoughts and try to build some content... I'd love to look you over again in a month!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 23:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that does sound like fun ...
I remember translating a German article once to make a substub I found during NPP into a stub, and that already took me ages. But we'll see. I might invoke WP:SNOW on the GA status though. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 23:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

If you even took articles you found via CSD to start class, it would be a significant distinguisher for you against your peers.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

A stub, not a start-class article. I'll try and look for some examples though. --Amalthea 22:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Amalthea, may I ask why you reverted these edits as vandalism? [2] This strikes me as not only rude since it's on another user's talk page, but to mark the edits of someone considering nominating you for adminship as vandalism is possibly worse. Hopefully it was an accident; if not, you may wish to explain to Balloonman. GlassCobra 16:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the faintest idea. I don't even think that I left that tab open? I am working on a fullscreen application, and my guess is that a stray mouseclick hit the twinkle rollback link when my application hit a breakpoint. It was quite certainly an accident, sorry Balloonman. :( I guess it's a good thing that it had relatively harmless consequences, I'll certainly know to take better care in the future!
Again, sorry. --Amalthea 16:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Apologies if my question came off harshly, I was just surprised to see it, that's all. I should assumed more good faith on your part, so my apologies to you there. If it's any consolation, I doubt Balloonman would have seen it. :P GlassCobra 17:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm grateful for the notice. And imagine how surprised I was ... :) Cheers, Amalthea 17:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

My First Article

Well, lo and behold, My First Article: ^*_**→ Johanna Wokalek ←*_*^*
I've admittedly chosen a rather easy topic. But I gotta give it to you, Balloonman and SoWhy, this was actually far more exciting then I thought it would be. And I've only just moved it to article space, so nobody has even seen it yet!

Potential Hooks for WP:DYK:

• ... that Johanna Wokalek, who portrayed Red Army Faction terrorist Gudrun Ensslin in the Golden Globe nominated The Baader Meinhof Complex, was Klaus Maria Brandauer's student?

Could also be shortened to:

• ... that Johanna Wokalek portrayed Red Army Faction terrorist Gudrun Ensslin in the Golden Globe nominated The Baader Meinhof Complex?

Or something different:

• ... that Johanna Wokalek had to tonsure her hair for her role as the female Pope Joan?

Not sure yet which one I'll present there, or if I'm allowed to propose several alternatives at once.

Regarding GA:

well written

Hmm. As well as I can. I'm not sure if I want to bug other editors to copyedit it now, I guess I could just leave it like it is and lure some editors to it via DYK (assuming I can accomplish that). I think the structure is good, and it follows the MOS.

factually accurate and verifiable

Yes and yes.

broad in coverage

This article is as broad as it can be, at this point. I've left out her more minor appearances, but all career cornerstones are in the article. She is very private about her personal life, and while I've figured out e.g. the name of her father she quite explicitly does not want those details become widely known, and as of today they aren't widely known, so I can't add anything there to the article.

neutral in point of view

Yes

stable

Of course, it's new.

and illustrated, where possible, by relevant images with suitable copyright licenses

That's a tough one. I haven't found a free image, and while I've sent e-mails to two organizations who own an image and might be willing to give it away I haven't heard back from them yet. Depending on where the premiere of her next film is I might be able to snatch one myself, but that's gonna be a while.

Huh, but actually, since the missing image is "not a failing criterion", all that needs more work according to the rules is the "clear prose". Besides my bad grammar, I keep putting too much information in too short sentences, pure facts without anything to flesh them out, which makes for rather heavy reading.
In any case, I have a hard time judging just how much work it really needs. What do you guys think?

Hey Amalthea, I was noticing this, and just wanted to let you know, for GA you don't need to have an image if they're hard to come by (although it might vary depending on who does the review); for example, not long ago I got Re-education through labor to GA, and at the time it didn't have any images. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 04:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I think I will just go ahead and try it, and see what the reviewer says, but only after christmas—I'll be offline most of the time till the 29th or so. Cheers, Amalthea 17:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

(continued) So, have I learnt anything that would prove useful in case I became an admin one day? Probably, not sure yet. Since the fun's only going to start once other editors are starting to take it apart, or start tagging the multitude of stubs I am going to create now to turn all those red links blue, I'll delay judgement on that.
But it was still a good idea. In fact, it was probably such a good idea that I think every prospective admin should spend at least a day on the other side of the fence, be it building articles, or patrolling new pages and recent changes.

So next stop: Turn all those red links blue, since each one leads to a notable topic. Aargh. How do you close this thing again?

Amalthea 22:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice work on that. I think your willingness to see the other side of the fence is proof that you would make a good admin. Who cares if it's not perfect? We are working together here so let some others read and fix over it, it won't be much for them to do as far as I can see. Great work, so keep it up :-) SoWhy 22:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. And thanks for removing the comment, you beat me to it. :) --Amalthea 22:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Did you actually do the research or was this transwikied from the German wikipedia? If you did the research, that indicates that Sie sprechen Deutsch? If so, you might want to add said userbox to your talk page, as is, my first question is, "Did he really write this? Does he know German?"---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 18:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. And no, it wasn't translated, it's all original. The German version is far less detailed, and not particularly well sourced. --Amalthea 18:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, you don't have to turn everything blue... in fact, some of them might not be notable enough to warrant turning blue... in those cases, leaving them black is acceptable. You only want to wikilink things that are in and of themselves notable enough to have an article. EG suppose we were dealing with an author. The author is married and has seven kids. The article might mention the wife and perhaps even the children. But none of them, based on being married to the author, deserves an article on their own. In that case, none of them should be wikilinked. Now, let's suppose that the wife was notable in her own right, but simply doesn't have an article yet. In that case, it might be acceptable to create a redlink---it indicates, "Hey, here's a notable subject that we need an article on." It serves as notice to you and to others who read it.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 18:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but most redlinks I've left have an article on de-wiki, and all but maybe two or three are quite certainly notable on their own accord. The sources I researched when building Johanna Wokalek mentioned the awards they've won, and if they were amongst the most notable national awards I've redlinked them. And I've already created 6 stubs for the articles that I'm planning to build next, I was quite surprised that we are indeed still missing a lot of articles even on contemporary topics. Cheers, Amalthea 19:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how stringent DE is, but EN has some of the tougher criteria for inclusion on articles. Some wiki's will allow just about anything, but they don't meet the mustard here. (I've seen people appeal to keeping articles hear because they are on XXX wiki and those arguments always get shot down, because as a general rule, we have higher requirements.)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 20:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Me neither, really, I keep hearing though that per policy they have the most stringent inclusion guidelines of all. I would have liked backing that up with a reference, but although German Wikipedia makes that same claim it's tagged with [citation needed]. :) I know that they have hardly any articles about albums or songs though, not even one about the infamous Virgin Killer album where there's plenty of verifiable material.
Anyway, I've thrown out three redlinks where I had my doubts about their notability, but I'm convinced that for the remaining ones I could build an article which would pass WP:NOTE with flying colors, so I'll leave them in.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

De-wiki is pretty, well, German about everything. I always felt they were ruled by the most hardcore bunch of deletionists on all wikis. They do not even allow articles about fictional characters with utmost notability like Doctor (Doctor Who). So I think we can say they are pretty stringent, yeah. It's one of the reasons I opted to work here instead of de-wiki (though that's my mother-tongue). SoWhy 20:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Notice how I explicitly didn't claim the En version was stricter ;-) I KNOW that there are others that have no real criteria and will allow just about anything, but I didn't know about our friends from the Deutschland. (Und weil mein Deutsch ist nicth so gut, ich hab' in Deutschland gewohnt. Aber, ich hab' viele Deutsch vergessen.)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 21:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I see. Your advanced Wikiplomacy skills are duly noted (Genau wie Deine grundlegenden Deutschkenntnisse). ;) --Amalthea 01:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Ja, wann Ich in Deutschlan gewohnt, Ich gehe mit meine Freunde zu eine Restaurante und sagt, "Wir sind sectzig" wann wir sind sectzehn. Damn... I probably shouldn't be typing aug Deutsche wann ich habe zu viel Alkohol zu trinken. Aber, mein Hemmungen werden gesenkt... ich hoffe das Sie verstehe mich... und mein Deutsche ist nicht zu sclecht. Es wurde die seit 20 Jahren studierte ich Deutsch und ich habe viele Deutsch vergessen... mein Deutsch is sehe schlecht. Ich muss jetzt schlaffe. Gutten nacht.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)Edit: Why do I think the proper response to this will be: ROFLMAO---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC) EDIT 2: I had to look up Hemmungen... couldn't remember it. Mein Deutsch is nicht gut...especially when I've been trinken.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Wann ich in Deutschland gewohnt, meine Freund sagt in Ameri-Deutsch... Ein Sentence halb Deutsch und halb English. Wir immer sagen, "Aufwieder bye bye."---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

ROFLMAO! Too much Glühwein at the company Christmas party? :) But yes, of course I understand. However I also know some who would tag this page now as G1 Kauderwelsch. ;)
Cheers & Auf Wieder-bye-bye, Amalthea 04:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Man, I need to proof read mein Deutsch... I notice a few spelling errors and case errors (Eg use of singular verbs with plural nouns.) Guess that's what happens when your trinken.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 20:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Freeze (Jordin Sparks song)

→ User talk:Big Dre#Freeze (Jordin Sparks song)

Augsburger Allgemeine

You're welcome. The Augsburger Allgemeine was my home newspaper when I still lived in Germany. When I noticed the article I tried to expand it a little but information is hard to come by, I found. Heaps of work left to do, when you got time, looking forward to read some more. EA210269 (talk) 03:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can find. Cheers, Amalthea 12:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Johanna Wokalek

On 21 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Johanna Wokalek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Just noticed this... CONGRATS!!! You're no longer a DYK virgin, doesn't it feel great!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 04:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, yeah, I does. :)
It was easier than I thought, and the article was only vandalized once in return. ;)
Amalthea 05:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

But I thought that was true? So what's the second article going to be on?---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but who isn't? It's just not encyclopeadic.
Second article? Something completely different: Allgemeine Zeitung (Namibia). I stumbled across a redlink to it when I was creating some stubs, and it seems like an interesting topic. It was a bit harder to get good sources for that one, but I have some decent ones by now. I'll try to compile it during the holidays. --Amalthea 05:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

If you want to get a DYK, then you need to make sure that you apply for the DYK within 5 days of creation---or 5 days of a substantial expansion of a stub. Right now, it's not even start class, so the clock hasn't started. I remember one of my first articles (after learning about DYK) I had written it in the mainspace, then I went to DYK when I thought it was ready, only to discover that the clock started 7 days earlier.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I know, I kept that in mind when I created the stub. It has less than 300 characters in prose at the moment, so a fivefold expansion is a given if I want to reach 1500 characters, the lower limit for a DYK nom. --Amalthea 05:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL now that is a little too meticulous for my tastes ;-)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Well they *are* really strict with these things over there, and as stupid as it is, getting a link to an article I wrote onto the main page was a driving force behind writing it as good as I could in the first place. So when I found the red-linked hatnote at Allgemeine Zeitung, google-searched it because I couldn't believe that it might lead to a notable target, and saw that it was actually an interesting topic, I did think about DYK before creating the stub. Certainly an unintended and negative side effect of those rules, now that I think about it. :-| --Amalthea 06:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

And heh, I just noticed your edit summary. :) Well, that's how I am. --Amalthea 06:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Your comments on the surveys

Hey Amalthea, with your permission, I'd like to move your comments about the survey's to the survey talk pages.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 23:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course, no need to ask, GFDL and all (but thanks for doing anyway :)). --Amalthea 02:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

GFDL gives you the right to do it, but propreity says otherwise... I've had people get upset about copying comments, because they may redact them or make further comments about them.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 04:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

A true CSD Survey

Well, I've gone through a number of CSD nominations from the past month and found about 40 that I thought might pose interesting questions on how people perform CSD's. Basically, I'm asking people to review the article in question and answering the question, "how would you handle this" with one of four options:

  1. Agree with criteria for deletion.
  2. Disagree with criteria for deletion, but would delete the article under another criteria.
  3. Disagree with the criteria for deletion, but this is a situation where IAR applies.
  4. Disagree with speedily deleting the article.

To see the surveys, go to this page. I'm hoping to get a good mix of people to participate in the surveys---people who agree with my interpretation of CSD and people who have different views. I'll post the results in a couple of weeks after getting a decent return.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 07:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, I took it. I'm not quite sure what you're planning to do with that survey. I would have kept the options uniform, as correct / different speedy / IAR speedy / not a speedy. Since you already added the reasoning why a particular SD criterion did not apply I'm sure the results are going to be skewed.
I personally would not have added any criterion in the first place, and left it completely to the surveyee, but again I don't know what you want to show. :)
As always, a number of these examples could fit more than one criterion, but I didn't list them in the comments.
Cheers, Amalthea 08:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Status?

I shot you an email.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonTake the CSD Survey 15:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Replied. I usually check my mail at least once a day if I'm online, so no need to notify me here unless it's urgent.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again

Thanks for pointing out the {{ArticleHistory}} tag to me. I did try to use it when the article in quesiton was userfied again (yes, now there are two userfied versions of the same article) but I discovered that, when used in userspace, the template assumes it is a userpage and not an article. What that meant is any "article for deletion" became "user page for deletion" and the overall wording was about "user" and not "article". Likewise there was not a way I could find to reflect the article was userfied. So on both of the userfied articles talk page I just did the manual boxes again. Soundvisions1 (talk) 19:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Eh. And the way it looks that work was for naught anyway, both your's and the user's. That turned out to be a far greater mess, with the second userfication and three DRVs? I guess that user can't be helped then if he just continues socking.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

2009 time!

To a good 2008 and to an even better 2009. Happy New Year! Acalamari 21:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

And to you, Acalamari! Thanks. :) --Amalthea 22:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

6-star rank

Hi
I noticed your article 6 star rank, but also saw that a very similar article was recently deleted following the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6 star rank. Do you know of any discussion of this concept in reliable sources that can verify the content of the article? Otherwise it will probably be deleted again very soon.
Cheers, Amalthea 05:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I felt that the article shouldnt have been deleted. It deserves to be it's own article, not just sections in other articles. Theverymodelofamodernmajorgeneral (talk) 21:58, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Theverymmodelofamodernmajorgeneral

Did you write the previous article, too? That one was deleted because there weren't any reliable sources that could be used to verify the content of the article.
Typically, the way Wikipedia judges whether a topic "deserves" an article depends on whether it has recieved coverage in reliable sources. Based on the article I think that there must be something out there. It would be very helpful if you could add to the article where you found the information you used. I'm guessing a book? It might share the fate of its predecessor if no references can be found.
Cheers, Amalthea 22:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

ooohhhh

"Detailed specification of deletion criteria is good when it touches the encyclopedic content" I like that - can I use that? ;) Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Although, I'm getting the strong feeling that this will be used against me in the future. ;) --Amalthea 23:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

What makes you think that? We all love and respect each other in these here parts. Happy 09 by the way. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh I don't know, just our track record of agreeing with each other. But you're right, it has gotten better. Probably because I wasn't around when WT:CSD#Today's change to G8 to include images without a "parent page" started ... ;-)
Cheers, and a happy 2009 to you, too!
  Amalthea 00:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome to voice an opinion on the criteria or propose other wording. I don't bite unless I am bitten. I have had my shots and am house trained too. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Jordin Sparks copyvios

Hi
CarloHi keeps changing a free image to a non-free image at Jordin Sparks (9 times in the last seven days), and I suggest that he be blocked for his continuing disruptions, along with his IP (autoblock should take care of this). I've approached him thrice regarding this change, told him of the policies, asked him why he wants that specific image, explained that we can't use it if we have a free one, but he never answered and just keeps doing it, so I left two more templated warnings.
He again changed it last night and uploaded the image once again, so I don't see that he's going to stop doing that anytime soon, and think that a block is in order to hopefully prevent future disruptions.
I'm coming to you since I noticed that you twice reverted this change yourself, and are somewhat familiar with the case. I don't consider this a content dispute, and don't think that you are too involved to consider action on this, but if you do I'll take it somewhere else.
Cheers, Amalthea 06:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea, I would have responded to your query sooner, but I was offline. Anyway, no it is not a content dispute to revert copyright violations: CarloHi has continued to upload copyvio images despite the constant flow of warnings. However, as the user hasn't been online much since you posted your message, I'll give them one last chance (and it will be the last chance). As this point, a block would be punitive, but if they violate policy again, a block will be justified. Thanks. Acalamari 20:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he only did it one more time, maybe he has given up by now. Based on the countless times he did it before I saw him going on like this for a while. Thanks, and Cheers, Amalthea 02:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Again and again, along with the image uploads, and he is blocked now for a short while. --Amalthea 03:47, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Gah, that's a shame. :( I thought they may have heeded the warnings; oh well. Anyway, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. :) Acalamari 00:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I've sent him to bed for a few days this time...thanks for the heads up - Peripitus (Talk) 04:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure, thanks for taking care of it. --Amalthea 13:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Jake Hamilton

Hello Amalthea --

I'd love to get your insight on what I can do to help my page on Jake Hamilton, which you've been helping me edit.

I got the picture after e-mailing the station, Hamilton's producer (Kim Gagne, I can give you a contact if you need it), explaining that I was putting together a page for Hamilton, and she graciously sent over a screen captured image from Hamilton's program. Is that okay?

Also, as I'm still working out the kinks of making a page, what was it about the Houston Press page that didn't work? I saw that it was listed under a "blog" page, but it was still printed in the physical Houston Press paper, which is why I thought it was fair game.

Any thoughts on the topic would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much for your help!

Martha Channing Whatsinaname62 (talk) 07:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC) whatsinaname62

I replied at Talk:Jake Hamilton, let's discuss it there. --Amalthea 13:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hellsing (disambiguation)

Please reconsider your CSD decline of this page[3]. Hellsing and Hellsing (TV series) are the same franchise, with the main Hellsing article already having the appropriate main link off to the TV series article, per WP:MOS-AM. We generally do not create disambiguation pages for splits such as this. The other link, Integra Hellsing, is for one of the central characters in the series, and at best should have a hat note at the top of the Hellsing article similar to Naruto though that is also generally unneeded for a character already well linked from the article. Helsing could also be a hatnote, if people really felt it was necessary. These are all basically related articles well linked in the articles and through the {{Hellsing}} template, rendering a disambiguation page no longer necessary as the other four links that used to be on the page (also all related) have since been merged into the Hellsing article. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That makes absolute sense. :)
I'll add the hatnote for Helsing and will revert myself in a minute. Cheers, Amalthea 20:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

For your amusement

Thank you for reverting vandalism over at The Saddle Club. While it is a subject I am not knowledgeable about, the article is a complete mess and those maintenance templates are sorely needed.

For your amusement, take a look at one of my sandboxes: User:Aoi/Sandbox2. Perhaps this might come in handy in the future? 青い(Aoi) (talk) 21:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's more sad then it is amusing. I noticed only through your warning (and her blanking) that she was editing again, Paul mentioned her a couple of sections above and thought that she was gone.
I too don't know anything about the topics, but as I said in my warning on her page, this has really gone on long enough. If she can't work with others then I'm afraid she'll have to go somewhere else.
That sandbox of yours will come in handy I'm sure, since although I really hope that she will reconsider and try to talk to people for a change, based on what I've seen so far I doubt it.
Well, we'll see. Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 22:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Toddcrob

Hi
User:Toddcrob is both author and topic of Todd C. Roberts, which is up for PROD. All the content is from him, so if he wants to stubbify it to try and save it from deletion, I say let him. No need to revert, even though he didn't provide an explanation for the content removal. What do you think?
Cheers, Amalthea 01:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realize he had created the article, so my take is that he has both the right to remove it too try and make it better and a COI since his username clearly suggests a connection.--Iamawesome800 02:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Right, the COI is also already noted at the article, and as you say pleasantly obvious. Cheers, Amalthea 02:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Freeze

Hi
Do you have a reliable source that can confirm that "Freeze" was released as a single, even in Australia? Cause I have already looked pretty hard, and all I can see is that it's played on air, but quite certainly there's no official announcement. Until there is, I'm afraid that we can't claim that it was, per one of or core policies WP:VERIFIABILITY. I hope you agree.
I will propose deletion of Freeze(Jordin Sparks song) until there is, since it's lacking the space between name and qualifier, and there already is a redirect at Freeze (Jordin Sparks song).
Cheers, Amalthea 11:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Also note that the reference you gave, "Jordin Sparks - Freeze Lyrics and Video", claims that it got their information from us at the bottom, so it doesn't have any real source either. Cheers, Amalthea 11:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello i have heard on tha radio that Frezze has been confirmed as Jordin Sparks Fourth Single and it is o n that site i refferenced so i odnt know why you dleted it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whish31 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, the page you listed said that they had their information from us. We have never had a source to confirm that it was really released as a single though.
Can you be more specific where you heard it? I can try and write to the station, to see if they really have a source for it, or if maybe the host who mentioned it also had his information from Wikipedia.
Without very concrete evidence I'm very hesitant to add it to the article though.
Cheers, Amalthea 11:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

i herd it on tha hot hit s radio show wif kyle and jackie o on Today FM (104.1) in sydney —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whish31 (talk • contribs) 11:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

They even have a page here. And if you'll stop vandalizing as you did three times at Jordin Sparks (album), I'll trust your word and will send them an e-mail, to see what source they have. --Amalthea 11:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I guess you're just here for mischief. I won't then. --Amalthea 11:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: 81.79.11.245

Ah yes! Thanks for that, downgraded to 1 week :)

The Helpful One 17:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Anytime. --Amalthea 17:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and a question

Hi, thanks for the welcome! I have a question about the Talk page....do I delete the previous person's comment if theirs is incorrect?

Ihavemcpheever (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Just place your comment beneath theirs. I've restored the one at Talk:Kelly Clarkson. In fact, you shouldn't alter other editor's talk page comments at all, with only a very few exceptions. If you're interested, you can read the talk page guidelines. Cheers, Amalthea 23:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! And I made a few responses, I hope I did them right! :) Ihavemcpheever (talk) 23:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Britney's new single, If U Seek Amy

Hi, so, the official site, www.britneyspears.com has confirmed TODAY that the new single will be If U Seek Amy, check it out:

BREAKING NEWS: Britney's 3rd Single! Posted under Blog, Music on January 7, 2009 It's official: 'If U Seek Amy' is the third single off Circus to be released. No other info is available in terms of video, cover art, etc. at this time.

Congratulations to the fans who guessed right!

source: http://www.britneyspears.com/

)

cheers. Guilherme —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.100.82.170 (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Let's keep this at Talk:Circus (Britney Spears album)#Confirmation of third single by Jive Records, shall we? --Amalthea 22:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You deserve this!

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For all of the work and effort you have put forth in assisting maintaing Twinkle, I award you this barnstar, Amalthea! Your contributions to the talk, bugs, and feature request pages help keep this WikiProject running smoothly, your code contributions make many changes as easy as snapping your fingers, and your boldness in enhancing the tool for everyone through new ideas is invaluable. Keep up the fantastic work! Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 17:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! It's my pleasure helping you out there, really. :) Cheers, Amalthea 18:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Hi Amalthea. Thank you very much for helping me with my table! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slapsnot (talk • contribs) 13:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Anytime. --Amalthea 14:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna

The Good Girl Gone Bad was been released in 2007 and 2008... the blogs have to be followed by:. blogspot.com or Blog.com Not a blog, how can confirm on Google —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitorvicentevalente (talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. A blog is a concept, and very much independant of any domain or web service. But let's keep the discussion at your place. --Amalthea 19:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The Portugese Wikipedia accpet this citation, and there because you do not like Rihanna's does not have to be modified, since the fact that Rihanna is the Queen of R&B is very well spoken, the more free encyclopedia Wikipedia and a shame in the face and has not threaten anyone, because if you believe I blocks will not be fine, too, does not know what I can ...User:Vitorvicentevalente12:35, 15 January 2009

anyway the Portuguese Wikipedia is more complete and informative you're btcUser:Vitorvicentevalente7:42, 17 January 2009

• Exact. I don't like this user (Amalthea) :( User talk:Rbwm14:20, 17 January 2009
  • I on the other hand have no ill feelings towards you, and am happy that you choose to discuss now – even if you're using a sockpuppet for that. And I'm thinking that the Portuguese Wikipedia isn't looking to kindly on votestacking either? --Amalthea 16:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

don't worry because even if you only need is that I will edit the English Wikipedia, because the page Rihanna in the Portuguese Wikipedia has more references and is the best, because now the second best is this article.User:Vitorvicentevalente User talk:Vitorvicentevalente20:51, 20 January 2009

but i don't like you. I think you ... a disfigured, And I think the Portuguese Wikipedia is much better than this, sorry I can not voteUser talk:Rbwm14:44, 17 January 2009

FYI

You might find Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lzki worth watching.—Kww(talk) 21:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Huh. Why, that's quite a number of familiar names! Thanks. --Amalthea 21:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC) ETA: Seems a bit like fishing though, but then of course there was Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/WIKI-GUY-16 ... --Amalthea 21:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you. We are appalled at how we have been treated at Wikipedia. My colleagues appealed, trying every avenue. We share one computer network, and hence are called sockpuppets although we are all different people. Someone published my genealogy because a colleague posted my bio, and as a consequence, my identity was stolen, and my email hacked. My colleagues and friends were given insults as responses. Is this what Wikipedia was supposed to be?71.242.195.155 (talk) 05:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

please calm yourself. Wikipedia is run by volunteers, with differing levels of competence and ability. Abusing those who have not harmed you is non-productive and unlikely to get you sympathy or assistance. Please read the reply I left you on Wales' talk page, thanks. Know that by posting with your IP on pages other than your user talk page, you are evading a block, and can be blocked for that. I suggest you let people know your user name and discuss this from your user talk page. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding, you say you "tried every venue" - did you read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks? KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

To Amalthea: Why did you advise this user to post on AN, in violation of his block, or to email ArbCom? Is there evidence he was blocked under a community ban and {{unblock}} has been denied? All I have seen is this IP posting on WT:Sig, User talk:Jimmy Wales, and here. Thanks! KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Only from their words at WT:SIG: I have been banned for no good reason; WP:BAN suggests to appeal at these venues, depending on the type of ban.
But you are right, pointing them there wasn't good advice at all. It's quite likely that they are confusing a block with a ban, and I should have tried finding out more before pointing them anywhere, and asked them to use the blocked account in the first place. Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 14:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Nods, that's what I thought probably happened - newbies often use ban when they mean block, and community (or a synonym) when they mean more than one admin or editor. As a general rule, I find WP:APPEAL easy to point them to, and they can learn what they need there without you having to question them and explain terminology ad nauseum. Thanks much, KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

My Life Would Suck Without You

This just seems to be a day that everyone wants to ignore WP:NSONGS and create articles whenever they feel like it. I do think it's important that people follow WP:NSONGS, because without it, nearly every single ever released would get its own article. This one's clearly a repost. I'm not going to revert it again, though. If they strip the CSD tag off again, I'm just doing to drop a notice on ANI and walk away.—Kww(talk) 21:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Isn't almost every day like that? :)
I know that you are more strict with WP:NSONGS than I am these days, I'm becoming much more an eventualist, and bookmark articles like that one to revisit later if there are enough people who want to work on it.
But yes, do that, I'd acutally be interested in whether it is going to be G4 deleted; as I said, I'm quite sure that it doesn't fit that criterion. Cheers, Amalthea 21:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, that settles it I guess. :) --Amalthea 21:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

If you notice the quick revert/rollback on that alternate title, sorry, I got a bit confused by the edit history on that thing.—Kww(talk) 21:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Heh, you thought I would start recreating it now? :) LOL & Cheers, Amalthea 22:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• So another user has already started a new version of the article. Are these just going to keep being deleted? Is it pointless to try to improve the newly-created article? -Whataworld06 (talk) 23:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Hmm, Protonk forgot to protect the redirect when he created it. It's gone again, but yes, that would have been futile when it's being actively discussed at DRV. --Amalthea 23:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• Will this page be re-directed to "My Life Would Suck Without You" once notability is achieved, or will the information need to be copied to the new page? Forgive me for not knowing how all this re-directing works. I am trying to work on the article a bit to improve it (please note the song has already reached number 3 on the US iTunes music chart, making it one of the most downloaded songs). -Whataworld06 (talk) 06:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
  • It will be moved there once the DRV is closed, probably by the closing admin by the looks of the DRV. Copy & pasting the content would loose the page history, which is very problematic with respect to the GFDL. --Amalthea 11:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks but don't...

I got User:Sam Korn to clean it up, and there are a few issues on top of what I said there that we ran into. —— nixeagle^{email me} 15:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Too late, it only took two minutes. :) --Amalthea 15:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Julianne Moore's Sex Life

If you don't like the truth. Then psi the adept student will never be interested in the real world that the puppet masters do not want you to view. I respect Julianne Moore as an actress, but do NOT believe in her choices as a spiritual being in the land of the material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric3w74 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• That doesn't explain the bollocks you added to her article. --Amalthea 19:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi!

Used to be an admin under my old username, but I gave back the tools when I left the project. I'll take a look at the request. Thanks for letting me know. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

• You betcha. I went ahead and did the ol' assumption of good faith. I wish the guy had acknowledged our concerns before I blocked him!  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Messaging

Do you use AIM, IRC, ICQ, MSN, Y!, GTalk, etc? Have a look at User:Ioeth#Contact Information and hit me up on one of them if you have some time. Thanks! Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 14:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I will ping you on IRC in a bit. Cheers, Amalthea 14:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

... if I can figure out how to do that, I haven't really used IRC in over 10 years. :) But you're probably just offline? --Amalthea 15:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Nope, I'm online, on the freenode server. Or any of the other messaging protocols too, whatever.  :-) Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 19:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Women in Sikhism

Thanks for that. I'll try & do little edits:-) I only picked it 'cos it was right at the end of the list! Have a good holiday. --dick (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --Amalthea 11:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Disamb page "All I Ever Wanted"

Re: User_talk:Andi064#All_I_Ever_Wanted. You were quite correct in restoring that. I misinterpreted WP:DAB without checking the MOS, sorry andi064 ^{T . C} 19:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

This courtesy notice is being offered on your talk page as you have been active in music related discussions in the past. A discussion of a proposed wording change to "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" - Criteria 6 is underway on the Notability (music) talk page. Your feedback is appreciated. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Yay!

I was wondering why my archive counter wasn't working! Thanks for the incredibly timely help. I've fixed it, or so I hope. It seems to be working OK, but will it just keep dumping everything to the Archive 1 page? I never could get this to work right for me. Thanks again. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

It'll automatically switch to Archive 2 once it passes 250K (maxarchivesize = 250K). --Amalthea 16:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks again! One less thing to worry about around here. Now all we have to worry about are the really slo-o-o-o-o-w servers today.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I just had to give you this

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For fixing the chaotic HTML on my userpage without being asked to. You are truly a nice guy SoWhy 18:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks ... but you kinda did ask for it. :) --Amalthea 18:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I expected tips - not a complete fixing :-D SoWhy 20:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Psalm 23

I'm flattered, guys, thanks!
I'm going to hold it back until at least next Monday, possibly the weekend after that (the 14th) if that's OK with you: I want to make sure that I'll have the time to answer questions when I transclude it, and also tie up one or two other things before. Cheers, Amalthea 11:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

No it's not ok.... oh wait, of course it is. The RfA is all about you and your stupidy willingness to subject yourself to hell serve the community. When you do decide to run, make sure that you have 2-4 hours to respond to questions... people used to be real finicky on answering questions immediately.---I'm Spartacus! ^PoppaBalloon 14:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Take your time (but not too much). But as you can see, you are ready to go whenever you like. Just don't forget to set the end date once you transclude it :-) SoWhy 16:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

And if you have a date in mind, let us know so that we can update our comments as necessary. Eg if you are planning on transcluding on Saturday, let us know.---I'm Spartacus! ^{The artist formerly known as Balloonman} 20:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Saturday it is, yes, probably while you're still asleep. In what way do the comments need updating though? --Amalthea 20:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, maybe we should change the timestamps so it doesn't look as if we were unable to get you to run sooner. You know, can't have old Spartacus and me looking silly and/or overeager

Ah, damn it! Everyone can read this page anyway...stupid stupid wiki system. xD

Seriously, I don't know what Ballo...err...Spartacus refers to but I think my comment is pretty okay the way it is. But maybe you create a new FA until then, that would be worth mentioning^^ SoWhy 22:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Update the time stamp, give him another once over, cover any recent developments (such as the RfC my sock is going to start against him.) No, it's more so that we have an idea and can make sure what we are saying makes sense. I'm probably going to tweak my comments some.---I'm Spartacus! ^{The artist formerly known as Balloonman} 23:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, now you know the date, so you and I can change stuff until Friday night and if he chickens out reschedules it, we can change it again ;-) SoWhy 13:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Not going to chicken out (although both you and TAFKB keep painting such a depressing picture); and should I happen to finish an FA till then I'll just mention it myself. ;) --Amalthea 13:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

ANI and HorseGirl070605

Hi. Treelo asked me to write you an FYI. Feeling that there needed to be some progress on handling her, I did an ANI on HorseGirl: [4]. There's been administrator response, but I'm not sure they understand the details. You would be in a better position to fill them in. I.e., perhaps explaining what motivated you to give her a final warning. I think it's worth noting that I recognize a basis for some of her edits -- these are political positions (as articulated by people that I know personally). Unfortunately part of the mindset is that a person who knows that they are right doesn't need to justify themselves, and in fact has an obligation to avoid having their opinions thwarted. That seems quite consonant with HorseGirl's long-standing behavior. At any rate, I hope situation this comes to a workable solution for all concerned. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Aargh ... I just prepared a lengthy comment for ANI, and Miszabot archived the thread just four minutes ago. :\
I'm not going to un-archive it now since it wouldn't have changed anything. I'm saving it cause it had quite a number of diffs, but in essence I agree with Dcoetzee's response, as indicated above. My conclusion would have been that should she make another edit she was previously final-warned for I'd support a swift block for a week, cause it's hurting the project more than it helps if she goes on and good faith is stretched to its limit.
However, when reviewing my history with her I was surprised to see that while she completely ignores templated warnings and calls for discussion, she apparently has listened when I explained why I changed or reverted her edits and at least for a while abstained from repeating similar edits. Maybe that's a way to cope with her OR and crufty additions to those horse TV series articles as well. It'd help if we had someone who knew the first thing about those though - maybe we should alert the main contributors of each of her favourite articles and ask them to keep an eye on them, and to try to evaluate and organize her additions to them. --Amalthea 14:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

vacation4

I've G7'ed it, should speed it up. :) — neuro^(talk) 08:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Amalthea 09:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Piped link problems

Sorry about putting anything more than necessary on your talk page.

I responded to another editor's question about what I was asking for. Maybe you or that person will be able to understand it better now. Thanks.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's simply both easier and more productive to respond where the discussion started, in particluar if it's at a public noticeboard like the village pump – evidently, since somebody else could apparently explain what you're seeing now. --Amalthea 12:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

CarloHi / Ccaj1995

Hi
Ccaj1995 (talk · contribs) is almost certainly a sock of CarloHi (talk · contribs), who was blocked by you, from his editing pattern alone: started editing the day after CarloHi was blocked, has an interest in Sequim, Washington and Jordin Sparks, and uploads copyright-violating pictures for those. I can open an SPI case if you don't block him right away, but could you have a look at the deleted uploads from CarloHi? I'm fairly certain that the exact image Ccaj1995 uploaded for Jordin Sparks was uploaded by CarloHi before.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 11:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

two images (jordan and the lavender farm) matches the last two from Carlo. From this and the editing it's clearly him. Thanks for this find...indef blocked and the images gone now. Happy editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peripitus (talk • contribs) 11:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of it. Cheers, Amalthea 11:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Since you answered my other question

If you look at the WSEG history you will see your answer led me to the result I was looking for. Thanks.

The question above it is about Wikipedia instructions that are incorrect.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Anytime. That incorrect section you linked to confuses me a bit, but I agree that it is almost certainly wrong (and I'm not sure it was ever correct). Just fix it, if you will, or I can do it too. --Amalthea 10:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you need to do it. The section makes no sense regardless of what I do. I guess I just don't understand the motivation of those who wrote the section. I would have thought instructions for editing would be done better. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I've rewritten it. The meta page at m:Help:Link doesn't have anything on section links with redirects, so I left it untouched. I listed examples of all the different situations, but I'm not sure if it's clear enough. The situation is easy enough anyway: it just works. Scrapping that section altogether would have been just as well.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I figured it out now: section links inside redirects only work with javascript enabled. I guess that was the reason behind the confusion. --Amalthea 16:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback!

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at Ioeth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 20:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The Amalthea Man

Are you any relation of The Amalthea Man?[5] Bishonen | talk 15:11, 14 February 2009 (UTC).

Huh, I'm afraid not, and I hadn't even heard of him till now. :)
Became a Swedish legend because he bombed a ship of British strikebreakers ... tough times! Cheers, Amalthea 15:20, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna Queen

[6] what u say about that? IMDB is not a good source? Vítor & Rihanna (talk) 18:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

No, IMDb is not a reliable source, and has never been. Their editorial process is at times very lacking, and it is (or at least used to be) quite easy to insert incorrect information there. --Amalthea 20:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Jake Hamilton Page

Hello Amalthea,

Sorry about the deletion without notice on the "Jake Hamilton" page. I work at the station with him and we've had some comments made about your comment on the discussion page that you thought Jake wrote the article himself, but I've had to vouch for him since the person who did write the article emailed me asking for information and a picture. I just thought that since the issue had been settled we could clear the discussion board or at least that comment so as not to raise any more unnesessary questions. If you have any other questions or concerns, please message me back or contact me at my offce. I'm still new to Wikipedia. Should I create a Log In? Would that makes it easier for you? Thanks for all of your help.

Thanks KG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.179.15 (talk) 04:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I find this very weird. The person who wrote the article identified herself as Martha Channing, and she previously posted from the same IP you do now. The only conclusion I can draw from this is that you are all working with Jake Hamilton after all. Note that this is not necessarily a problem. All it means for now is that you have a conflict of interest; I'd recommend you have a look at the guideline at WP:conflict of interest to prevent any problems. For example, you shouldn't advertise his top ten list as you did at Slumdog Millionaire and WALL-E, and it is probably easiest to discuss changes to the article itself at the article's talk page first.
You can create an account if you want, it will make communication easier if several people are active from the same place.
Talk page discussions are not usually removed, only if they are e.g. disparaging or otherwise inappropriate or misplaced. I don't think that this is the case here.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 13:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Alan Paul

If you wanna PROD or speedy this, be my guest. I'm not even sure if the subject would meet WP:MUSIC outside of the band, and if they keep adding the copyvio text it's probably not worth it. §FreeRangeFrog 19:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I still have the article bookmarked, and thought to give the author a week or so to try and expand it, and show notability per our talk page advice. Otherwise I was planning to redirect it to the band article, seems to be a plausible search term at least.
Thanks for the note! Cheers, Amalthea 20:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Redirect sounds like a good solution. We'll have to keep an eye on it, probably. Oh well :) §FreeRangeFrog 20:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Rollback.

Hey Friend, I noticed you used twinkle rollback here to rollback good faith edits from an ip. Please don't do that in future. Use undo, rollback, even twinkle rollback, is for vandalism only.--Patton^t/c 16:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Patton.
Thank you for your message. You will notice that I did add a link to WP:DATE in my edit summaries there, both times I undid those changes (see the edit history of Call Me a Mack for example), and have left the user welcome messages and informative messages at the same time, first at User talk:65.10.154.245, and then later at User talk:168.221.157.196. I do consider those reversions appropriate since they were well explained, both to the user and to fellow editors, and reflect consensus.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 17:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I know you did, but please, in future use undo or good faith twinkle rollback for edits taht aren't blatant vandalism.--Patton^t/c 19:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I did assume good faith, and left the user a welcome, so I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat it in the edit summaries. I agree that it would have been better though, and will try to do that in the future. I don't think that Undo would have been any better though, but that's because I do not discern between which way one uses to revert an edit: only what's written in the edit summary counts, and "Undo" doesn't sound any better than "Revert". I see that others feel different, and will respect that in the future. Thanks, Amalthea 20:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

transfer answer

I agree with your answer to question 10 of your RFA. An administrator was nasty so I stop looking at Wikipedia. I decided to oome back today.

The page is protected. Please transfer this answer to your RFA (you can cut and paste the sentence below) Please don't refuse to do this.:

• Support Agree with question 10 answer. Contino (talk) 08:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. The RfA page isn't protected, so if you still want I'd prefer if you added it yourself.
One other thing: I trust you have read WP:SOCK#Clean start under a new name? I would encourage you to notify arbcom about your name change, as outlined at WP:SOCK#Alternative account notification, to prevent future misunderstandings. Since you offer to disclose your username anyway I think that this won't be a problem?
Thank you & Cheers, Amalthea 11:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

If he or anybody other than the person making the support adds it, it will be challenged/thrown out, if you want to support you need to do it yourself.---I'm Spartacus! ^{The artist formerly known as Balloonman} 15:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Lyrics sites

I was under the impression that Yahoo! Music had permission to post lyrics. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear, that was an extension to why Cowboy Lyrics, Roughstock's, LyricWiki, and almost all other lyrics sites mustn't be used. I was trying to strengthen your argument that they are not only not reliable, but actively a violation of copyright policy. Cheers, Amalthea 20:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: TW Problem

Fixed it by copy pasting the config. to my monobook. You're a star Amalthea! Thanks very much! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 01:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Anytime. --Amalthea 21:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

"New" user issues

Rowdy the Ant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I have an issue with this new user, mostly image related. They clearly are very young (I handle kids very badly) and has a grasp on some concepts but not all and misues the ones they do know. There's been attempts to have them adopted or mentored but not much came of it and also another editor has spoken to an admin about him but little happened there also. I don't want to deal with this user anymore because they don't seem to want to learn and if anything seem almost knowledgable about some workings of Wikipedia what with a good few edits going into the template-y side of things... I have minor suspicions about them being related to a small-time vandal with socks but I'm assuming good faith for the time being. What can you suggest, talk to them if you like but this isn't nothing short term, much of the same thing involving existing content has been going on from anons since early December. They're not non-communicative which is good but they don't seem too keen to learn from repeated mistakes which is bad. Oh and well done on getting the mop, see you upon your return. treelo _radda 03:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• See also Talk:List of minor characters in Peanuts. Rowdy merged the whole list to List of Peanuts characters despite two really clear oppositions to such a merge. I have explained this to the user, but would appreciate a little more pull. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 04:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, that seems to have been thoroughly taken care of already. --Amalthea 21:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I know, I was hoping it'd be your inaugural block, maybe next time. treelo _radda 21:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna Talk

I hope you forgive me for the problems it caused and insults. I hope you forgive me and not hate me for that, and give your opinion on "Genres" on Talk Page. Vítor & Rihanna (msg) 21:50 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. In the future, I ask you to take notice of edit summaries when you are reverted though, and go to the talk page and start a discussion there instead of rereverting yourself.
In that specific case, I had already asked you about that source at Talk:Rihanna#Genre a couple of days ago; please let's come to an agreement there, and not change it again one way or the other. OK? --Amalthea 22:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and one more time sorry :) I already answered at Talk:Rihanna#Genre Vítor & Rihanna (msg) 22:29 22 February 2009 (UTC)

The user Bookkeeperoftheoccult remove the Billboard source. I already change the order. Vítor & Rihanna (msg) 23:19 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I opened up a RfC on the talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. We probably could have gotten to an agreement with the editors there, but broader input won't hurt. --Amalthea 00:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Just curious, I have to ask, what made you decide on your user name? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This page. Seriously :) --Amalthea 00:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I'm a big fan of The Last Unicorn; lead character's name is Lady Amalthea. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

But you say I had to prove that Rihanna was R&B, now says no? Vítor & Rihanna (msg) 23:37 22 February 2009 (UTC)

No matter, I will not discuss, see the article now please :) Vítor & Rihanna (msg) 23:37 22 February 2009 (UTC)

My condolences...

Well, your days of peace and innocence are now gone... I wish you the best of luck, and hope that you prove WP valid with your edits. Sorry I didn't get a chance to !vote in your RfA I usually wait til the end, but I have a real life deadline rapidly approaching that has kept me away from WP for the past two weeks. It's so much that I've decided to take an official WP break because I have about 10 days left before its due. But you are the third Balloonman/I'm Spartacus! canddiate to fail to get a support vote from your nominator!---I'm Spartacus! ^{The artist formerly known as Balloonman} 03:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it! Nominator support is taken pretty much for granted anyway, and from your comments elsewhere I knew I still had it.
And, concerning peace and innocence, I was wondering once or twice already if taking that step was a good move in the first place, but I'll do my very best not to disappoint!
Thanks, and good luck with your deadline, Amalthea 10:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

How do you solve a "problem" like HorseGirl070605?

As we know, this user has been a long term issue what with non-communication, persisting with disruptive editing after being warned, several final warnings and recurring blanking of their talkpage bordering on bad faith removals. A week ago they decided to up sticks and retire as "[t]hat way nobody has to block me" which is probably the nicest part of the parting shot left on the talkpage before the customary blanking[7]. As I was looking over their page and helping them to leave I decided to fix the retiring template but their contribs show they're still editing, maybe more sporadically than usual but still contributing eitherway. Seeing as there's implicit admittance to not being able to follow WP policies, disliking the other editors and a whole heap of other wikiquette issues including the most recent issue of trying to skirt being blocked through a fake retirement I can't see why they shouldn't be blocked as it's been clear for some time that they simply cannot conduct themselves without some issue popping up. I'm figuring a word on WP:AN or WP:AN/I might be helpful but I'm very recent to the whole HorseGirl issue and figure someone else might be able to do a better job as I don't think just tossing it to WP:AIV will work, much too complex. Thanks for any input. treelo _radda 03:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Yes, she's a bit difficult. As I see it though, she hasn't done anything disruptive since the last string of warnings she recieved (including the more verbose final warning I left her). She appears to be really young, and while I'm not sure that what she's currently doing is constructive (I don't know the first thing about Saddle Club), I'd give her some leeway. If she returns to her more disruptive habits then yes, I'd take it to WP:AN3 or WP:ANI right away; as I told her, this has gone on long enough, and if she can't listen or cooperate, then she is more harm then use for the encyclopaedia, even in the long run.
What she's doing isn't vandalistic, so like you said AIV isn't the right place. Also see this section higher up on this page, Aoi has compiled all warnings she received (and blanked) in one of their sandboxes.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to think that age isn't an issue here but competency is, age shouldn't be used as a means by which to get around scrutiny of someone's actions. I'm fairly certain looking through Aoi's archive of her talkpage that there's only so many warnings you can get before something has to be done or you start to recognise you're doing something wrong. If you're willing to assume good faith on her part and mentor her then we can see how that goes and if she's responsive. As usual with these things it's merely a wait and see process now but I wouldn't expect anything coming from it. treelo _radda 16:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, neither do I really, like I said above. What I tried to say is that she appears to be so young (and I use age pretty much as a synonym for maturity here) that I'm willing to AGF for a long time – I don't think she meant to be disruptive, and none of her edits from the last week have been undone or seem clearly inappropriate, so she might have taken it to heart after all. If I can get her to start talking to people, it's just the better (although I certainly never planned adopting anyone). But I also meant what I said on her page: if she continues with her disruptive editing, then I will take it to the appropriate admin board, since this has gone on long enough. --Amalthea 17:18, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I see, I admire that you can assume good faith for such a period, I couldn't. Still, let's see if she responds and doesn't fall back into old habits. treelo _radda 17:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

(undent) Not exactly falling back into old habits but definitely trying to skirt a possible block by editing as an anon. I think HG knows she will be blocked so is putting up the whole "retired" thing in hope people forget what she did and can keep editing nonsense into a handful of articles. I don't look kindly on people who think that using an IP address allows them to get out of trouble, for me all good faith is gone but how is it looking to you? treelo _radda 12:52, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Another new IP address has come up, more discussion regarding her here. treelo _radda 16:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Meh. I still think she is clueless (It's very obvious that that's the same person behind all edits), but if the anon edits aren't anymore constructive than the ones made through her account then yes, I agree, it's more trouble than it's worth since she plain refuses to work together with other editors. I haven't looked at the edits yet, I have to catch up with my watchlist first after my vacation. Cheers, Amalthea 16:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, this is just to update you, not looking for any action so soon after your return but it looks like a visit to WP:SPI will be in order. treelo _radda 16:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's actually so obvious that an SPI is not even going to be necessary. And even my patience has reached its end now. She has recieved a number of new warnings a couple of days ago, all my attempts at communication are ignored. Her mainspace edits today are OK, but if she does anything disruptive in the near future I'd recommend we ask Efe to block both IP and account for a bit (he reverted the blanking on the IP's talkpage recently, I'm assuming he might be familiar with her). --Amalthea 11:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

SPI cases aren't the same as RFCUs, an SPI case is OK for this and it just doesn't need to have a checkuser performed so it's just like a SSP case. We really should get this problem dealt with before she fluffs up again so it's probably the most direct course of action even though it doesn't really dealt with the non-communicative element but a block is a block. treelo _radda 11:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thing is, I'm not sure that she conciously switched to anon editing to avoid scrutiny. It's blatantly obvious that she's the same editor, but she did stop editing for over ten days, maybe she even followed your advice and scrambled her password.
I haven't looked closely at her edits during the time I was away, but from what I'm seeing right now she's walking the line now. Most of the content she adds isn't really encyclopaedic, too much trivia and fancruft; that's not something we block editors for, even though I agree that she's far more trouble than she's worth. And I still don't think she's editing in bad faith, but I'm fully aware that I might just be naïve in this case. :) She is gaming the system with her presistent claim of retirement, so I'm with you three if you want to call on ANI, or a specific admin; if left up to me I'd wait for something clearly disruptive, something she's been final-warned for before, e.g. reverting without discussing.
Oh, how much easier a good ol' vandal is ... --Amalthea 12:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I doubt she did, maybe I'm giving her too much credit but it sounds as if she abandoned her account as if nobody would follow her. She's left, just that it's only the account and not Wikipedia as a whole. If she did scramble her password, why hasn't she given up and left like she said she was going to do? Like you say, she already reached the end when she continued after her first final warning and the anon editing is just an added element so I'm happy with the gaming aspect seeing as she has been doing it for some time with the whole "break a policy, leave for a week, return in hope nobody remembers, repeat as necessary" thing she's had going since the start of 2007. I figure that either some post to ANI, an SPI case or getting the ear of an interested admin would be best but I reckon whoever has the longest history of dealing with her should handle those things. I never seem to get regular vandals, always the incivil ones. treelo _radda 19:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) OK, seems we've been reading material for HG and given this I think blocking the account and the IP addresses used by her would be the best way forward because even though she says yet again she's going (fourth time so far) she will not unless someone says "you're going" because we can't have the same thing starting up again when she gets "withdrawal issues" again. She'll never work well here by her own admission of her privacy being of greater importance than the others working on the project with her so another clear WP:COMPETENCE case. treelo _radda 10:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Nothing has really changed though: we are not blocking anyone on request, and her editing hasn't changed IMHO. Feel free to bring it up with Dcoetzee though, who is keeping an eye on all of this anyway. --Amalthea 11:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

He is? Huh, didn't notice. Anyway, I'll go ask as I reckon you might be right not to act unless we need to and hopefully you're not getting rid of me or the issue. treelo _radda 12:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

I removed your edit, and I added source in the edit reason. If example Sylvester Stallone is Italian American then surely Paris is Norwegian American? Nastykermit (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added on 17:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC).

Thanks for your message. IMDb is not a reliable source, and even though it says that her great great grandfather was Norwegian – that doesn't, in my book, make her a Norwegian-American. She doesn't self-identify as one, follows no Norwegian traditions to the best of my knowledge, and with a cursory search I can't find a reliable source naming her Norwegian-American either. It certainly shouldn't say so in the lead section, but it could mention her Norwegian heritage somewhere in the text farther down, if there's a better source for it.
But I would ask you to raise this issue at Talk:Paris Hilton, in particular since it was removed again already with this change. --Amalthea 23:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I thought it was. Nastykermit (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added on 19:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC).

Fred M. Levin

Thanks for answering my question. Mwalla (talk) 16:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)mwalla

Anytime. --Amalthea 16:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!

When I read at WT:TW that you had edited another user's .js file, I was a little surprised because I knew that you weren't an admin. Well, I see now that you're a brand new one. Congratulations! I've been impressed with your input on Twinkle, and it's great that you can continue to work on that more easily now. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, it makes things a lot easier at WT:TW. Cheers, Amalthea 01:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I spotted it in the Signpost, congratulations also from me. :-) Dcoetzee 03:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Um.... Uh oh?

Twinkle just tagged a massive number of User pages wrongfully... I changed the image in a Userbox, then put the original up for deletion and then some crazy stuff happened (Special:Contributions/JohnnyMrNinja)... There's nothing I can really do about it now, right? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 05:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it does that; it's a bit weird when it happens with user page images, and even more so if you don't expect it, but it's in accordance with the IfD instructions so I wouldn't worry about it too much. Not sure what common practise is with user pages though.
You could replace the images right away with the higher quality image from commons. You tagged only those user pages where the userbox has been substituted, so they will link to a broken image anyway once the IfD closes, and it's only a couple of pages. --Amalthea 10:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I saw it processing a ton of User pages in the Twinkle window, I thought it posted at all of them. It didn't really post on that many. I thought it was everyone that has the template! Thank you for patronizing me :). I should probably sleep now... ~ JohnnyMrNinja 11:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, right, that has to do with what you said at the IfD discussion page: the WhatLinksHere page is still out of date, so Twinkle had a look at all of them. It only found the image on the few where the userbox was substed, so it edited only those. I actually think that Twinkle should at least ask before it processes more than, say, 10 pages, or at least mention that it will when you create the IfD. And sorry, I didn't want to sound patronizing at all!
Cheers, Amalthea 11:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It didn't, I was kidding. I just might have looked at my actual contributions more carefully. I had a brief panic moment at the time, but I quickly slipped back into not really caring. It might be nice if it implied that you aren't actually editing all those articles at the time, for the feint of heart, and the asking thing would be nice too. I'm seriously going to sleep now. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 11:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Good night, then. :) --Amalthea 12:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

ReJoys Sebastian

Hey Man... no dude... Im not mr Joys Sebastain But the Content was copied from his website... which im going to rewrite... thanks for your help dude... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.146.22 (talk) 16:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Gaga

Hi Amalthea. I believe we haven't come across each other but i am very impressed with your work on Rihanna so thought of asking you a little favour. Could you please review the Lady Gaga related articles once especially the single pages and see for any discrepancy? Also the tour article is listed for deletion. Could you give your input for it? Thanking you --Legolas ^(talktome) 10:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Legolas. Hmm, I really don't know the first thing about the good woman, I don't think I'm particularly qualified to do that, especially since all I'm doing with Rihanna is keep her watchlisted, and fact check any new additions. I can start doing the same with her article, but no promises, my watchlist is already pretty huge and it might get kicked off again.
Have you asked Efe about a review? I'm not sure he has the time, but he's doing a fine job with his rewrites, maybe he can put it on his to do list. --Amalthea 11:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks indeed!

Heya Amalthea,
Sincere thanks for your help here. Please feel free to add, or to not add, this Southern Marsupial Mole-shaped and arguably somewhat dubious Barnstar for helping me to your awards page.
Again, thank you so much for your sincerely appreciated help.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Brightwood Page

Hello,

You deleted the page I was creating on Brightwood. These guys are a band from portland who is being signed to a record deal and I was going to start filling in information. This is my first wikipedia article so I don't know what I did wrong but I would like to find out, so that I can get this page back up.

Thanks, EPS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epsalome (talk • contribs) 15:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Epsalome.
Your article was deleted since there was no indication that the band might be important or significant, and I couldn't find anything myself via google, or on their myspace page.
I have, for now, moved the page into your userspace, to User:Epsalome/Brightwood (band). You can work on it there undisturbed, if you want. What needs to be shown however is why this band is important. Wikipedia is not a place to gain notability; topics have an article here if they are already notable. You can find the typical criteria used to determine notability of a band at WP:BAND. Usually, to show notability you have to add references to independent reliable sources where the band has recieved significant coverage.
You should also have a look at WP:Your first article. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.
Amalthea 16:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Different Beat (Michelle McManus album)

Hi

Yesterday you redirected this article (and also Different Beat) to the main Michelle McManus article. The editor (User:Saving My Face) that recreated the two articles has now been blocked as a sock puppet of User:Nimbley6, however an IP (which resolves to Nimbley6's ISP, Opal Telecom) has popped up and reverted your redirects. I've rolled back the edits (in hindsight I should probably have un-done them, since it's not really clear-cut vandalism), however I wondered if you could take a look at the IP and block if necessary.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 21:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, disregard - IP has been blocked as a Nimbley6 sock. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 21:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that was quick, I was just looking at it. Thanks, and Cheers, Amalthea 21:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

That was fast! Only just noticed the little blighter... Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 20:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I learned from the best. ;) --Amalthea 00:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

User:I-210

You may want to consider undeleting the pages in his userspace he requested to have deleted (at least the ones with an actual edit history): the editor has recently been moving his talk page around and trying to have it deleted. I noticed it had been declined at least once, for what that's worth. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, disregard, you didn't delete it. :P For whatever reason I didn't see it in Special:Prefixindex. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Yes, I had noticed, I declined the one that had the actual page history (and watchlisted it), the ones I deleted were only redirects from page moves. I also noticed this gem ... --Amalthea 01:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it was his edit there that got me looking at what else he'd been up to. :P Now it seems he wants to revert war on that template (he reverted me after I undid his edit). =) —Locke Cole • t • c 01:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I was just typing up a message about that, yes. --Amalthea 01:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Selçuk özdemir

The story so far;

Article created by user originally was a pure online CV.

I csd'd it, and an admin rejected it, inexplicably.

I therefore prod'd it, and another admin supported the prod.

The user removed the prod tags, and did, admittedly, edit it to be less CV-like.

Still a totally non-notable person, therefore I csd'd it again.

If procedure dictates that the 2nd csd has to be declined, how do I now proceed? If I prod it again, prod says clearly the user can remove the prod if they disagree with it - even without changing the article.

This is a simple case of a new user single purpose account putting their own CV online; it should've been a trivial act for me to get it removed; it's turning into a great long winded buerocratic load of hassle. If you disagree and can see any way this can be a valid article...well, jsut let me know your thoughts and ideas regarding the darned 'procedure'.

Thanks for your time,

--  Chzz  ►  03:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't have a particularly close look at the article, just saw that SoWhy previously found claims of notability in the longer version, which gets it past A7, and those claims don't change if an article is shortened or cleaned up. In general, an article should only be retagged for speedy deletion with good reason, in particular if it was declined by an admin. Note that if speedy deletion is declined, it doesn't mean that the editor who removes the tag necessarily thinks that the article should be kept. I certainly didn't, in this case. It only means that they didn't find it covered by any of the narrowly defined SD criteria, and that both article and author deserve more eyes on the page than just the tagger's and the admin's.
If speedy deletion is declined and you are still convinced the article should be deleted, PROD it. If that is declined too and you still think it should be deleted, list it at AfD, which is already on its way for Selçuk özdemir. If it sounds somewhat bureaucratic, consider it this way: the normal way of deleting an article is through discussion in an AfD. There are two shortcuts you can take in certain circumstances, CSD and PROD, but if both are denied you have to pursure it the normal way.
Hope that helps, and Cheers, Amalthea 19:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It's already up at AfD, and it looks very much like it'll be deleted. --GedUK  21:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Multiple warnings

You know, I've been having a mess of problems in regards to Huggle warnings today... It would say in the log section that it is warning them (You know, it shows up in red text), but then the edit never stays in the log. I go to do it manually, and it does it just fine. It's unusual, and I think it might have to do with Windows 7 screwing around with my system clock or something... I haven't used Huggle for a couple weeks really until now, and I just started using Windows 7, so I'll have to take a look at what is going on. Thanks for telling me this. Until It Sleeps 22:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Munto

Sorry, the history was at Sora wo Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai. The page got moved around a couple times. But I need the article to be titled Munto in the end, hence the speedy deletion request.--十八 23:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that seems to be a text merge, not only a copy&paste move? If we would merge those histories we would end up with interleaving revisions from the two articles. The only thing that could be merged without much trouble are the revisions from March 1, but the prior revisions in Sora wo Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai need to stay in a seperate article, so I don't think it's worth it since there needs to be a note somewhere anyway that content from Sora wo Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai was merged into the article.
Also, with all the moving around, I'd really like to see some exchange on some talk page that the other editors agree with the move. Sorry to be a bother, but this one is quite confusing, I'd hate to make it even more so by more unnecessary moves. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 00:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, basically, I need the basically non-existent history of Munto deleted so that I can move Sora wo Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai's history there, since just yesterday it was. Once that is done, the content at Sora o Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai (notice this is a different article than the one previously mentioned) can be copy/pasted into the page at Munto, since there was a merge request to merge the content from Sora o Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai as evidenced here into Munto which had been there since January. This was why I originally requested a speedy deletion of Munto so I could do all this. And I don't believe there needs to be a talk on the talk page for this. If the pages are to be merged together anyway, it has to be this way since Munto predates Sora o Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai. So if you could kindly delete Munto, it would solve everything.--十八 00:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted Munto, and will let you do the moving. You and Dairi seem to be on good terms, I was just worried with two redirects in a row today that there might be disagreement I was missing. Cheers, Amalthea 00:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You deleted an article about Blue Basement

Hi

I wrote an article about the band Blue Basement. Why was this article deleted? There are several articles about other bands, and they are not deleted.

Juchmako (talk) 09:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Juchmako.
Your article was deleted since there was no indication that the band might be important or significant, and I couldn't find anything myself via google, or on their myspace page.
If you're interested I can move the page to your userspace where you can work on it more or less undisturbed. What needs to be shown however is why this band is important. Wikipedia is not a place to gain notability; topics have an article here if they are already notable. You can find the criteria typically used to determine notability of a band at WP:BAND. Usually, you have to add references to independent reliable sources where the band has recieved significant coverage.
You should also have a look at WP:Your first article. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.
Amalthea 18:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Rafael salvador

u deleted rafael salvador because he had no importance. He is the youngest player to reach 100 mph. a guiness record. also throws 21 different pitches. another record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookkeper (talk • contribs) 05:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I deleted because the article text gave no indication why the topic is important, and indeed none of the information you just stated was in the article. If you know of some kind of a reliable source that mentions one of the two facts you just gave me and considers it significant then I'm very happy to restore the article for you. I could also move the article to your user space where you can work on it pretty much undisturbed. Cheers, Amalthea 10:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Novice Clumsiness

Salutations!!! I am sure that you know that I took it upon myself to merge the Munto and Sora wo Miageru Shoujo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai articles. I do not regret taking the initiative since it seemed that nobody was going to make the first move, but I do wish that I could have performed that operation with more dexterity -- my greatest regret since it is my first merge. While I understand that criticism is a part of life and that it is to help you grow, Juhachi was a bit harsh in his reproof by a margin that I do not think is warranted.

I am curious about one thing, Amalthea . . . you said that it seemed like Juhachi and I are on good terms. What makes you say that? When I first joined Wikipedia and edited the episode list for 'Zettai Karen Children', Juhachi lashed out at me at every turn because I took the initiative so often to add new episode synopses as I saw each new episode and employed a style different from his. Wikipedia encourages editors to be bold with their editing and I am only complying that exhortation. Juhachi's perspective of Wikipedia's purpose is different from mine . . . I am of the sentiment that it is the nature of encyclopedias to read a bit thick as they enlighten the reader about a subject matter. The crucial challenge before me is to discern the threshold for when the text reads too thick to be of utility in an encyclopedia and gauge my proximity to it. This is the rationale behind me polishing my handiwork several times after initially adding a new episode synopsis for 'Zettai Karen Children'. I want to do the job well and really apply myself . . . and as a byproduct, I want anybody who encounters an article I have modified and sees the revision history to detect that. I thought that I was making headway in that regard, but Juhachi still seems to nurse his grudge against me in spite of my efforts. They say in Patch Adams that while it is a matter of chance if you treat the disease, you will always win regardless of the outcome if you treat the person. I wonder how I can better conduct my comprehension of that axiom . . .

Dairi no Kenkyo (talk) 06:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

You left a quite friendly message on his talk page while I was looking at the issue, so I figured you weren't on any kind of dispute about the merge, or name of the article, which was the only thing that I was concerned with at the time. If you are, I encourage you to work it out on the article's talk page, and possibly invite other editors from the associated Wikiproject to the discussion. Cheers, Amalthea 10:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

To expand a bit on that, after reading your talk page: Don't worry too much about it. BOLDness is encouraged, and making mistakes is allowed. If you are unsure about something, it never hurts to ask first though. If you disagree about content, seek wider input to form consensus, as I e.g. by inviting appropriate WikiProject members to the discussion, as I mentioned above.
Cheers, Amalthea 11:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

"copy-paste of an article without proper attribution"

Hi Amalthea

Would you kindly clarify which CSD criterion the above rationale falls under, because I can't see it? I speak regarding User:All TV Episodes which you deleted. Also G2 seems to exclude user space.

Thanks, Martin^msgj 09:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Holy cow, it does! Aargh.
OK, technically, a copy&paste of a GFDL article without source information could probably be deleted as a G12 copyright infringement. If it is clear where the content came from then it can very simply be attributed in some way (as I did with another of MZMcBride's nominations).
The whole thing has a bigger issue behind it, which I only realized once I worked through MZMcBride's nominations from yesterday. See User talk:MZMcBride#Your CSD nominations for the exchange I had with him, and WT:UP#Non-contributors for the discussion that has been going on for a couple of days.
I did delete the ones that were clear copyright violations, deleted a number where the author had only made copy&paste edits to his user space from several months ago as test pages (which I believe they were), and declined a whole bunch where it wasn't non-controversial, in my opinion.
I see that the letter of G2 doesn't apply here, but did believe they were non-controversial deletions. If anybody disagrees I'll be happy to restore them, so that MZMcBride can bring them to MfD as he has done with all the ones I declined.
Thanks, Amalthea 10:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

... and I now notice you've already found the MfDs and the discussion. :) --Amalthea 10:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wholespear -- that particular page appears to be cribbed from Microsoft Encarta. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Elephant Family

Hi Amalthea,

I am new to Wiki editing, and I have permission from the Elephant Family to use the text I uploaded to Wikipedia. It is not an exact copy of the content on their website, but uses elements of it, and the edits have been agreed.

I have read the help pages but I am still not clear on how I send the permission email to you - please can you advise?

Many thanks

--Emmaherbert (talk) 10:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Of course. There are three possibilities to get copyrighted material accepted here on Wikipedia. You can either

1. have the owners of the copyrighted text make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL at the site of the original publication (see WP:IOWN)
2. have the owners of the copyrighted text send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation (see WP:IOWN again)
3. rewrite the text in your own words. You can use the information from the website, but not the sentences (and the slight modifications that had been done aren't quite enough for it)

In this particular case, I would recommend the third option, for two reasons. First it's a rather short text anyway, so it's probably easiest and quickest to rewrite it. Second, the text wasn't quite appropriate for an encyclopaedic article about the organization anyway (a copy from an organization's website hardly ever is). Try describing the company in a neutral way, and not by getting into specifics about the decline of the elephant population; it's worth mentionining that this is what prompted the organization's existance, but details about that topic are already in the elephant article.
Have a look at, for example, the lead section of World Wide Fund for Nature.
Lastly, if you have a strong affiliation with the organization you probably have a conflict of interest, and I would recommend having a look at our FAQ for organizations
I hope that helps, if you have further questions feel free to ask! Cheers, Amalthea 01:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

After your successful request, I've added the user right and you're now an admin. Spend some more time on the administrators' reading list and use the new tools wisely. It's often better to de-escalate a situation rather than adding fire. Keep up the good work and I'm sure you'll do well. Again, congrats. - Taxman ^Talk 12:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, Amalthea! :) — Aitias // discussion 12:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. I'm sure you will use the tools wisely. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, everyone, for participating and taking the time to look me over. I was amazed and awed by the number and kind of supports I've been getting, will take all concerns to heart, and will do my best not to disappoint.
And now I'm going offline for the weekend. :)
Cheers, and thanks, Amalthea 12:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, I knew it would be a walk in the park for you. Here is your free admin t-shirt and now get to work!!! SoWhy 14:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Aw, so close to WP:100! Oh well, at least you got the tools. Congratulations, and good luck with the mop! :) →Dyl@n620 14:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! Thoroughly deserved! :) --Ged UK (talk) 15:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Congrats, welcome to the club! –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

More congratulations! Another level head on the bridge! Piano non troppo (talk) 18:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations. seresin ( ¡? )  22:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, again. And Dylan, I didn't do this for vanity, I don't care at all if I'm on that list or not. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 10:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Very Well Done! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SheffieldWednesdayFC (talk • contribs) 19:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Consensus for this

Looks like there is a unequivocal consensus at WT:AFD for the change and no oppose at WT:PROD. Do we wait for some more days or just do it? I will watchlist this page because the notice above says so. —Magic.Wiki 18:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It's probably fine. No editor voiced concern, people are already used to it from the CSD notifications, so I think we can go ahead with it. Not sure if I get around to it today, but I'll try tomorrow. Cheers, Amalthea 19:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

K thanks :)—Magic.Wiki 19:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Done, for {{adw}}, {{AFDWarning}}, {{PRODWarning}}. I also change Huggle so that it will use the standard PROD warning from now on instead of its own. Huggle doesn't appear to be configured to allow XFDs currently, so I ignored {{huggle/xfd}} for now. There are still a number of other notification templates for IFD, CFD, RFD, TFD and MFD that I haven't touched. They can too be extended, but the respective XFD talk pages should be asked first.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Ummmm

Hi. You keep editing something that I write. I won't say where or what, if your smart enough you'll know.

I study and research professionally: Quantum Mechanics, Astrophysics, and Special Theory of Relativity, and Particle Physics, and I am well educated of Traditions throughout the world. . . . So as I am confused, why you think, something does not make sense? Perhaps it was not correctly said. I will revise and post a more professional reasoning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.46.88 (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

From what I'm seeing I undid two of your changes:

• The addition of "Your an incompetent individual" to Wikipedia talk:Talk page, a misplaced and very uncontrstructive comment
• The addition of "Photoelectric effect. Quantum Perpections. It was underminding, Lack there of knowledge, reasons for dismissing the theory, and lack of doctorate, it is liable to claim an ignorance. All is lost for history. Because, individual had not known or cared to have known." to Emission theory (vision), another misplaced comment, and one that didn't make sense – the photoelectric effect has nothing to do with this emission theory. If you disagree, head over to Talk:Emission theory (vision) please and explain what you're trying to say

If I'm missing any other edits, please point them out to me. Amalthea 09:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I also, examine quantum chemisty. . . Do you like your fancy plasma? Your welcome. (Some more elaborate emphasis)

Photoelectric effect. . . Has much to do with everything. . . . HELLO? I will head over there. In immovable spaces. . Light carries energy, and causes small elementary particles to recoil. . . Inside that, is ___. New technology. Instead of deleting something, I do not know much of wiki. So.. Point direction for me if, mere so you thought of Opinionated postulates. . . Thank you for your understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.46.88 (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

TWINKLE Problem

You seem to be the "go to" person for TWINKLE problems or reporting them. When I use the "ARV" tab to report a user to AIV, the report doesn't go through, even after the status window says it is complete. This is obviously a TWINKLE issue, but I am unsure how to report it. Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk • March 10, 2009 @ 00:10

Could you come to WT:TW and describe your problem there? And could you also make a note which browser you are using, and if you are noticing any Twinkle-related errors in your javascript error console? Thanks, Amalthea 13:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I did and you can find my post here. Please let me know if I need to provide further information. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 11, 2009 @ 15:37

Chester Gregory

Hey. Thanks for cleaning up the history on this page. I really appreciate it. OlYeller^Talktome 19:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for saving it from deletion. :) Cheers, Amalthea 19:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

RE: African Americans in Davenport, Iowa

So, here, I'm I correct in seeing Spartacus abusing his power and just undeleting a page that had a consensus to be deleted on AfD, or am I missing something? CTJF83Talk 02:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's keep this on Spartacus' talkpage for now, please. --Amalthea 08:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Editor review

Hello there, remember me?! I've just submitted myself for editor review. I'd be grateful if you could spare a few moments to have a look and comment, as I'd certainly value your opinion. Wikipedia:Editor review/Ged UK. Cheers! (PS your reply above is exactly why I supported your RfA! --Ged UK (talk) 14:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course I remember you, and not only because of the delightful comment you left at my (sort of) editor review. I will have a look, but that will almost certainly not be before next week. Cheers, Amalthea 14:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

That's cool, no rush :) --Ged UK (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Gentle reminder, don't want to come across as nagging, but i'm keen to work out whether there's anything i need to work on ahead of an RfA. Thanks! --GedUK  10:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Me again! Just thought i'd drop a friendly reminder as it will be being archived soon, and i'm also just about to go for RfA :) --GedUK  13:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Sigh. :(
I'm so sorry that I haven't taken the time yet to do that. I did start writing some stuff up two weeks ago, when I noticed your dialog with SoWhy on his talk page, but haven't looked through your contributions yet. That'll take me a lot of time, which I'm severly lacking at the moment (I have even given up keeping up with my watchlist, for the first time in months, and am only trying to keep up with the Twinkle support since Ioeth is MIA).
If you say you're just about to go for RfA, do you have a specific time in mind? From the comments I got at my Rfa and some others I followed around the time, I think that an RfA is far easier if you wait longer than you'd probably need to. I'm guessing it's because if you get exposure to editors over a long period of time, and your comments are constructive, many will generally have a good feeling about you or even assume you are already an admin (which is a very nice comment).
Basically, for some generic advice that I'm pulling only from your edit count summary: I'd wait for a good while longer before starting an RfA (like, two months or so). I do assume that you would pass already (again, without a deep look into your contribs, mostly judging from the reviews you got), but I'm sure it would go smoother if people (the RfA crowd in particular of course) would already have a clearer picture of you. From what I'm seeing, you've started commenting at ANI only about two weeks ago. I know this is advice you got from SoWhy, and it's good advice so that people will see your knowledge of policy, and your opinions and interpretations on them. ANI can be a good place to demonstrate that. Of course, as evident at Baseball Bugs current RfA, it seems it can also be a place to disqualify oneself, and I personally would stay far far away from it and only skim the headlines, just like at WT:AN and WT:RFA. There are a number of noticeboards, policy talk pages, process pages (WP:AfD, WP:AfC, WP:RfA, WP:FAC, WP:GAN) around, I'd much rather suggest finding one that interests you there, and giving your input to them. What you'll want to show in an RfA is that you have a use for the tools, and that you are knowledgeable in that area. From a glance, I'm not really seeing where you'd use them. (ETA: well, you've got a number of AIV reports of course which I've just ignored. There's not really a lot where a non-admin can contribute there, but I think Wisdom still does some clerking at AIV. Not sure how much sense that makes. I'd recommend in any case you look through your AIV reports and check whether any have been turned down, and if so why.)
Darn, this is getting longer then I planned, I really have to get back to work. So, conclusion: From what I know I think you're doing fine, and if you're looking at RfA I'd think you'd pass. Waiting longer so you have a continued history of thoughtful and constructive contributions to the WP and WT namespaces (not counting WikiProjects) would make an RfA go far smoother. And, really, there's no need to hurry towards the bit. Having it is helpful, but honestly no fun at all.
Generic RfA advice that you already know: if you have any skeletons in your closet, be up-front about them. If they are unearthed during the RfA they'll bite you.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for this! I understand where you're coming from. I have contributed on ANI more recently, but i have in the past too, though not much, but i've been watching it and AN for quite a while (summer last year or thereabouts). The RfA is imminent, today or tomorrow (when my nominator logs back on). Believe me, I'm not running because I think mop-wielding will be fun! Thanks again, and I hope that you find some spare time too! --GedUK  14:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, good luck then. I can't promise you that I'll take part in it cause I generally, well, don't, since it requires the contribution-diving I mentioned above. But I'll be watching it in any case! Oh, and make sure to read the WP:How to pass an RfA for the "how not to screw up your own RfA" advice. Cheers, Amalthea 14:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I agree with Amalthea on almost everything he said, but if you want to run now, noone can stop you. I can offer to co-nom you if you like. Regards SoWhy 14:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that to both of you :) Camaron agreed to nominate me (unless he's changed his mind) and FlyingToaster co-nom. I don't know if another co-nom is helpful or not, or even good practice, but i certainly have no problem with that if it's OK with you. --GedUK  14:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

←Well, paint me wrong, Ged, this is a veritable joyride. :) --Amalthea 15:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Paris Hilton Discography

I NEVER said that "Paris for President" was a single, thank you! But if you just go look on YouTube (i know its not "reliable" or whatever) you can see that many other people have said that her new album will be called "Platinum Blonde" and I dont care if its true or not. I'm just excited for it to come out, because from the song clips on YouTube, it sounds really good!! I really dont care about being rude or what ever problem it is you have with me, get over yourself!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fat beezy baby (talk • contribs) 23:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure you did, with this undo.
I don't really care how it's called either, but I do care if we are spreading rumors, and all I'm seeing in this regard are rumors.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Cheers for picking me up here :) Sigh, I am not the smartest mouse in the SPI maze :) Gonzonoir (talk) 14:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, it *is* a maze, and it was a good thing linking the two. Once the new SPI case had been renamed to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fronsdorf it should be enough though, and the backlink is already in the SPI page. Cheers, Amalthea 14:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Squirrel fishing

Our friend seems to be back [8]. I'm not sure what warning template applies here, so I'll leave it to you to decide what action is needed. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I left him another note. Cheers, Amalthea 18:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hi! :) Can I create a separate article for The Best Damn Tour? I know that the page was already created, but was merged to The Best Damn Thing, but now I want to do a separate article, can I do it? Sorry for my english ^^ --Smanu (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

In this paticular case The Best Damn Tour was merged following a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best Damn Tour (and the article was subsequently protected due to repeated recreations).
Consensus can change, however, and it might very well have changed since the deletion discussion took place before the tour even started. Assuming Mangojuice (who closed the discussion at the time) has no objections I'm willing to unprotect it (the admin who protected it isn't active any longer) if you can give me a good indication that the tour is a notable one. Do you have one or two reliable third-party sources handy that cover the tour in detail, so that it has a chance of passing WP:NOTABILITY? The ones that are currently in the section are pointing to Avril Lavigne's homepage and to Amazon, so they are no good to show notability.
And don't worry about your English, it's perfectly fine! Cheers, Amalthea 19:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I've found this, this, this and this. Are them reliable enough? --Smanu (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Some of those were from before the tour, so I've just had a look for myself and found quite a lot more out there (1 2 3 4 5 6), seems to me like one could build an article from that now, although I'm not sure if there is really enough to warrant a standalone article. I'm going to quickly ask Mango. --Amalthea 13:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Looking at this a bit longer and getting some more input, there's two options. We can either open a discussion at deletion review right away, present the sources from above, and look for a consensus to allow recreation of the article, or you can start working on the tour in the The Best Damn Tour section in the The Best Damn Thing article, and expand it to a point where it should be split into a standalone article.
Cheers, Amalthea 19:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank for all you're doing^^ you're very kind! I think that I'll work on the page and expand it! Thank again --Smanu (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot problem response

The only prolem with that is I preview my talk page and the thing that shows the archives isn't there. Carabera (talk) 21:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Transcluding the Miszabot template will make the bot archive your talk page threads, but it doesn't take care of providing links to them (and in any case, it couldn't show any since you don't have archive pages at the moment). However, you are already using the {{talkpage}} template on your talk page which will automatically provide links to archive pages if you stick to the default naming convention, i.e. have them called "/Archive 1" etc.
Oh, in the future, please try to keep a discussion at one place. It needed some investigating until I figured out what this was in reference to. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 21:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I do have archive pages but I have not had any archives yet due to the problems I had. Carabera (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Not really. You have a sub page in userspace called User:Carabera/Archive1. If you set up the bot, it will by default create your first archive page at User talk:Carabera/Archive 1. There's no need for you to create it for him, and MiszaBot will add a header declaring it as an archive page.
As I said above, the {{talkpage}} template only picks it up if you follow the default naming convention. If you have them called differently, you'll need to link to the pages manually, as I do on my talk page.
If you want I can configure Miszabot for you. --Amalthea 21:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Please configure it for me please and if you are or know an admin, please delete the old archive page please. Carabera (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Done and done. I've set it up similar to how I have it, it'll archive all threads with a timestamp older than 14 days. Miszabot typically runs at around 12:00 UTC, so you'll need to wait a bit till you see it in action. Cheers, Amalthea 22:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a million. Cheers. Carabera (talk) 23:44, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Scripting

Hi! Thanks again for helping me with the AssessorTags script, but I've encountered another problem and was wondering if you'd be able to help, if you have a chance. I have another "Test" version of the script in User:Drilnoth/monobook.js and what I'm trying to do is retrieve data from the "biographyliving" subcategory of the "biography" subcategory... but I just can't figure out how to successfully retrieve it and append it with the other biography parameters. If you have the time, it would be much appreciated if you could look at the code and let me know what needs fixing if you know (or feel free to fix it yourself, if you're able to). Much appreciated; thanks. (and if there's a different user who might be better equipped to help me with these, please direct me to them). Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C) 14:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

That should simply be e.target.getChecked("main.biography.biographyliving"), shouldn't it? Since you've set up the values as with the task forces appending it should simply work by steppping through this list again, like with the task forces.
What helps tremendously with javascript debugging is installing Firebug (Firefox extension), so that you can step through your scripts and inspect the objects.
For scripting questions I think WT:WikiProject User scripts is probably the best place, but I've never contributed there. Cheers, Amalthea 15:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay; thanks. I've tried a couple of ways to get it, but not that exact one. And thanks for pointing me to WT:US! –Drilnoth (T • C) 15:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Template Barnstar
		Thanks for fixing the talkback template and making it even better than it was before :D. Nn123645 (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

How nice, thanks! --Amalthea 20:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I Do Not Hook Up (single)

Sorry! I honestly had no idea! Very sorry about it, it's just that I didn't find any second or third-party sources confirming it, I didn't think about her official website. Please assume good faith. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 21:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I had removed the information numerous times from her article before, too, while there was nothing to verify it. I know that your PROD was only placed in the best of faith, and my edit summary was merely supposed to be informational.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at The New Mikemoral's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yeah, so sorry...

 The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 22:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

No need to be sorry, as I said just some friendly advice for the future. Cheers, Amalthea 23:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I have been on Wikipedia for a while, but I still make these big errors. You think I would have learned something in my last 1,900 edits, huh? --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

FurMe

Hi I'd like to thank you on helping me on my Twinkle configuration a while back. I am now experiencing problems with FurMe similar to another user. I tried reduce the height from the default, but it doesn't work. Could you take a look? Cheers --DFS454 (talk) 18:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		The Guidance Barnstar may be awarded to users who help others locate valuable resources, information, or assistance. This barnstar is awarded to Amalthea, for the wonderful assistance provided on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Amalthea is a real asset to wikipedia. Thank you so much. Ikip (talk) 22:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Anytime, glad I could help. --Amalthea 01:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Zebedee arrived

time for bed--Shirt58 (talk) 14:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

"A Rhinoceros Beetle never forgets. Or is it an Elephant Beetle that never forgets? I can never remember... "

• Hi again,
  "I'm thinking that this was only per accident?" - you're too kind. I would have said that I simply wasn't paying enough attention. Thanks again for your most appreciated help. I've already awarded you the Southern Marsupial Mole-shaped and arguably somewhat dubious Barnstar for helping me out, which I note you have very wisely chosen not to display on your (non-existent, but mutatis mutandis, richly deserved) awards page. Again, please feel free not to display this Australian Rhinoceros Beetle-shaped and unquestionably dubious Barnstar of fixing my mistakes on your non-existent awards page.
  Again, thank you so much for your help... and belated congratulations on your en.wikipedia adminship. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  ps: you might find these edits interesting.
  • Err, thanks. I'll be sure to add the bug to my (non-existant, quod esset bona¹) awards page. :)
    Asterix and the Goths, I liked that one, although it's not particularly flattering for Germans. But the gag-bit (Heh) is an interesting idiom indeed.
    Amalthea 11:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
    ¹⁾ No, I don't speak Latin, all I can do is quote from the Bible and from Asterix and hope that the cases aren't too wrong. O tempo'a, o mo'es. Beati pauperes spiritu.
    • In the English version of Asterix and the Goths, the Goths marched to the count of "ein, zwo, drei" When I read it as a kid I found this so interesting because <shirt58 rambles on for hours> cognate, Grimm's Law, proto-Indo-European, The Story of English etc, etc.</shirt58 rambles on for hours>
      Of course, the French language itself wasn't even extant at the time the Asterix series was set, and ... <shirt58 rambles on for hours again/> I can only imagine what [[Asterix in Australia]] would be have been like:
      Asterix: "You mean you don't ride kangaroos to school?
      Obelix: (toc, toc, toc) "These Australians are crazy!"
      What's more.... <shirt58 rambles on for hours again/>--Shirt58 (talk) 11:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
      • (Tock, Tock, Tock) Der spinnt, der Shirt58. ;) --Amalthea 11:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

AIA awards question

Hello Amalthea,

I am an architectural student at Penn. I wonder whether I can find the AIA national awards for architectures each year since the beginning? There are about 20 years. I did not find them on AIA's official website. Thank you!

Sisi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.123.137.74 (talk) 06:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

By default, you should ask such questions at the WP:Reference Desk. From a glance, all I can find is AIA Gold Medal – is that what you're after? --Amalthea 11:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Amalthea/Title image

Hi there. I am a bit n00b-y when it comes to such technical gadgetry like you employed at {{User:Amalthea/Title image}}. I wondered whether you could help me achieve a similar thing on my user talk page. I wanted to replace the "User talk:SoWhy" with something like "SoWhy's talk page", coloring the nick like in my sig, but not using an image for it like you do. I don't seem to grasp the way to do that, so I wondered if you could tell me what HTML/CSS/stuff code I'd need to do that. Regards SoWhy 07:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was more a proof of concept for how some new(ish) javascript can be abused. :)
See User talk:Amalthea/Test for some plain wikicode that'll work for you. Your "Why" will by hard to read using modern skin though. The "User talk" could be styled differently, too, or hidden completely with "display:none". Cheers, Amalthea 08:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

But there is no way to remove the "User talk:", is there? Everytime I tried, it stopped working oO SoWhy 08:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you can hide it. That's how it works when one replaces it with an image. Amalthea 09:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. So I need the complete page name hidden and then can add anything I like non-hidden? SoWhy 09:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Apparently I don't get it. How can I add additional text? Do I need to <span> it as well? SoWhy 10:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, I posted the following one hour ago, but edit-conflicted so that it didn't commit:
The logic is that the textContent (javascript function) of the element with the id "RealTitle" needs to, if wikilinked, point to the current page. The reason behind that is that a copy&paste of the page title should still be usable as a wikilink to the page. So no, you can't add anything you like, but you can add formatting, and you can add images (although one should always give them an empty title to ensure the copy&paste functionality).
I don't want to rule out that adding additional text is possible somehow, but I don't know how (except of course with ugly absolutly positioned css hacks that won't properly work with other skins).
Cheers, Amalthea 11:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, too bad. I remember one admin having "<Nick> (administrator)" as their userpage title which seemed to work without CSS hack but I have forgotten which admin that was and Google is no help in finding that (because you cannot search for "(administrator)", it matches "administrator" as well). Thanks anyway :-) SoWhy 11:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

If you remember or find it again, please let me know. :) --Amalthea 12:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I will (if I remember). Cheers for the help anyway, much appreciated. :-) SoWhy 12:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Re; Allison Abbate

Hello Amallthea,

I removed the born in NYC and the other info you suggested for me to remove including one of the New York Times, Ileft the other New York Times because it does show her name as Producer. I also took out the "wrapping up", and also "much anticipated" because looking back that seemed superfluous. I am new to this , so I appreciate your patience. If you could respond on my talk page that would be great as i am still trying to figure this out.

Best Regards, Liza Dodson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickey7474 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks great now, and Dori has already moved it into the main space. Congratulations on your first article. :) If you need any more help, feel free to ask.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

request for comment

Sorry for inconvenience, please, take a look and give comment for following discussion at Template talk:Nasdaq#interwiki. -- A^VB^talk 11:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Replied. --Amalthea 14:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Category-Class template

You're quite right, a page move would make more sense. Any chance you could move {{Dab-Class td}} to {{Disambig-Class td}} (same situation with those templates), or would you rather I made the request at WP:RM? Regards. PC78 (talk) 20:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it's done, otherwise someone else has to read into it, and it seems uncontroversial enough. Cheers, Amalthea 21:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! PC78 (talk) 21:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Your userpage and signature

I wanted to ask you how you create userpages and signatures like the ones you have. If you're too busy, don't worry about it, but I was just curious. I haven't done too much work here yet, but I'd like to look a bit more professional if I could. Unitanode (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

You can edit your user page like any other page. Just go to User:Unitanode and write about yourself. Try not to make it to mySpacey though, please. :) Concerning signatures, have a look at WP:Customisation and Wikipedia:SIG#Customizing your signature. Basically, you can set a "raw signature" (the wiki code that will be used for it) somewhere in you preferences.
If you look for inspirations for either, just look around, there are plenty of examples here. --Amalthea 01:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I like your sig particularly. Simple and classy. Thanks for the links, though, and I'll try to take a look at them when I get a chance. Unitanode (talk) 01:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, feel free to rip it off as you please. ;)
Cheers, Amalthea 01:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, then, let me see if it worked. Unitanode 01:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

You might want to change the "color:#823824" to something unique though, after all, you don't want to be seen as an Amalthea-clone, do you? (Not that that would be a bad thing ). How about Unitanode? Or Unitanode? Regards SoWhy 11:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you're probably right about that, sorry. Let me see if this works... Unitanode 22:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

First Presbyterian Church (Buffalo, New York)

Dear Amalthea,

I really do appreciate your diligence in policing Wikipedia, especially concerning my recent entry on First_Presbyterian_Church_Buffalo,_NY The First Presbyterian Church of Buffalo, NY. However, the website I copied some of the information from were in fact my own, there was no copyright infringement involved.

Sincerely,

Bruce McCausland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortbruce (talk • contribs) 02:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I realized that, which is why I restored it and left you a comment on your talk page.
You do realize that you gave up your copyright to the text when you submitted it to Wikipedia, right? I'm asking because of two of the edit summaries you left in First Presbyterian Church (Buffalo, New York), but you probably just wanted to point out that the original text found on the internet was written by you.
Have you decided which way to go to mark the text on your website as released under the GFDL? This is I'm afraid a necessary requirement, otherwise it puts Wikipedia in some legal trouble.
Thank you, Amalthea 10:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Amalthea,

I was not aware that by publishing my content on Wikipedia that I was giving up the copyright to the text, that was not my intention. My intent was to share the information and educate others which is the greater purpose of any encyclopedia. I have no problem with others using the text, except that I would expect credit to be given, and if possible asked concerning its usage, and where it is used as I have also tried to do. I am unclear as to how this should be done on Wikipedia. I would in fact appreciate your guidance so that I don't make that mistake in the future. I will certainly study the Wikipedia guidelines closer so that i can format the page properly as well. It is a bit different then HTML, and still takes a bit getting used to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortbruce (talk • contribs) 12:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello Bruce
Beneath the edit box it says "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the GFDL". This clashes obviously with your edit summary, and if it wasn't your intention to release it under the free license and wish it deleted, I will certainly do that for you. The GFDL is a rather complex thing. Basically, anyone can use the text for any purpose, even commercially, but they always have to declare where the content came from, i.e. point back to the Wikipedia article with its edit history. You will not be asked, and you will not be directly credited. The edit page also says, at the bottom: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." It's a crass way to put it, since usually collaboration on an article to make it as good as possible is a pretty nice thing, but you should be aware of it.
You're certainly right that it the wiki syntax takes some getting used to. It was designed to be useable by the layman, but it certainly has some flaws. It's often easiest to look at the source code of other articles, and see how they do things. The style guideline for articles have evolved here over the years, and are rather complex, too. But don't worry if you didn't quite get it to look the way other articles do. I've placed that tag on the page to attract other editors to it, in time they will start and format it in a way that it fits in seamlessly.
I hope that helps a little, please get back to me and say how you want to go on with your article.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Again!

I have no problem with others using or modifying or adding to the content for accuracy. There is always the concern about misinformation on the internet, and there is quite a few sites that have inaccuracies published, I know that is however, unavoidable. Concerning its reuse or distribution, so long as the content is not used for profit that is fine with me. My expectations are that this will by 2011 be part of a published book, although my intent is that the profits will go back to the church. Thus, it is more a "labor of love" then a work with any profit motives. One reason I have not posted any recent photos is because of those same copyright issues as I will be taking those photos myself and thus control the copyright. I appreciate your insight and input concerning this!

Cheers!

Bruce —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortbruce (talk • contribs) 13:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid that it can't be promised that the text won't be used commercially. If it is to remain on Wikipedia, it has to be released under the GFDL (or a compatible license), which means that it explicitly can be used commercially (with attribution to the respective editors, i.e. with a link pointing to the Wikipedia article). If you're not prepared at this point to release it under a free license then we need to remove it again.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Please leave it on, I'll take that risk. So long as it does not effect my rights in publishing my own the work at a later date, I'm fine with that.

Thanks!

Bruce —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortbruce (talk • contribs) 13:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

OK great.
Reading what I said above again, it wasn't quite correct: You of course didn't "give up" your copyright, by agreeing to have it on Wikipedia you simply licensed it under the GFDL. So it quite certainly doesn't affect your rights to publish your own text, it's still yours, but you agreed that others use it as they please as long as the attribution is left intact.
Thank you, Amalthea 14:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for fixing the archives box on my talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure, anytime. Amalthea 13:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

moar harts!!

yayyy thx i luv u :D GlassCobra 14:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andrew V.V. Raymond

Hi!

Here are some web references and some additional references.

http://books.google.com/books?id=xVUYAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1082&lpg=PA1082&dq=andrew+V+V+raymond+union&source=bl&ots=9RQ0wKPbbO&sig=MaegDwfepWNqnYWLpeRUhE3pEe8&hl=en&ei=9ZjTSc7QK6brlQfQlp37Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9D00E0D61F31E033A2575AC0A9659C94659ED7CF

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9B00E0D81330E733A25757C0A9619C946397D6CF

http://www.union.edu/About/presidents_of_union/index.php

Specifically: http://www.union.edu/About/presidents_of_union/raymond.php

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F00EFD81E3FE433A25755C0A9629C946996D6CF

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9F00EFD81E3FE433A25755C0A9629C946996D6CF

Specific references are:

   New York Times Obituary published 6 April 1918
 Some information obtained was condensed from Wayne Somers, compiler and editor, Encyclopedia of Union College History (Schenectady: Union College Press, 2003), page 599.  source: Union College website.
 Source: NY Times obit. Published 6/12/1907
 Source: Who’s who in New York City and State, page 1082, pub. 1907
 Death announcement in 7 April 1918 FPC Bulletin indicates an earlier death date.

I know I can probably get more parallel references too.

BTW: Someone else decided that the First Presbyterian Church-Buffalo, NY pages needed to be deleted again....sigh. Can you help clear this up, because I thought we went through all this.

Thanks!

````

Bruce McCausland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortbruce (talk • contribs) 17:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I have several email addresses including my brucemccausland.com. If it requires that I send my request from that domain I can copy the message and send it from there. Thank you for your diligence in trying to maintain a high degree of integrity on this site, however, it is a bit frustrating for serious researchers such as myself who only want to educate and share our work for the betterment of humanity.

Cheers!

Bruce Fortbruce (talk) 00:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC) ( I have to remember that <shift> key! :-D

Yes, that would be good, but please do remember to mention the license you want to use, as explained by Moonriddengirl! :)
And I fully agree that it is difficult and bothersome to put material into Wikipedia that was previously published elsewhere. I believe I apologized for this in advance in my very first message to you, and Moonridddengirl said something similar. It is, however, necessary to protect Wikipedia, the copyright holder, and even the editor who uploads it. Just imagine if someone else had found your website, found the information useful, registered an account with a name similar to the domain, and uploaded it without your knowledge, thus infringing your intellectual property. I'm sure you'd want Wikipedia taking every measure to ensure that the uploader really owns the rights to the content. Editors upload quite an amount of copyrighted material each day, and staying on top of it is a Sisyphean task. The only way to do it is to require proof from the editor in such cases.
And in the end, writing such an email is rather easy, the hardest part is getting the details right is.
Anyway, thank you that you're still with us, and you weren't scared off by all those hurdles. Cheers, Amalthea 09:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Infobox awards

I see that a discussion had taken place on WT:ACTOR, but your removal of the awards section (or the request to remove it) was too quick. Not everybody is always aware of these discussions, not many know about that, and not many had the awareness to give their opinion. I personally did not know about that. I'm sure many didn't. It should have been done in a different way, as someone already commented in the section, with more editors being involved and more time being given. Shahid • <sup>Talk2me</sup> 12:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Please see my response to the posting the editor made at WT:ACTOR regarding this. A project proposal should be posted at concerned project pages, which was done, and sufficient time was given to allow editors to read and respond - which included a weekend. It isn't the responsibility of those involved in a change proposition to personally invite those who sign the page as project members to come read a proposal, they should have the page watchlisted. Both persons who posted concerns after the proposal was closed were on Wikipedia every day since the proposals were listed and didn't bother to look in, read or post objection. One cannot force editors to come read postings to projects who have never bothered to participate in discussions on the page before. I do not believe that more time would bring others in that don't bother anyway. And for the record, Amalthea did nothing improper in making the change to the infobox. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:20, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, 7 days is not enough for something that was here for over two years. I'm an example of someone who does care for this and would eventually come to opine, but didn't know of this discussion. Unless my opinion does not matter...

It was like doing something secretly. I can't see why not inform editors of the discussion, and if not, at least should've let it remain for a longer period. Shahid • <sup>Talk2me</sup> 16:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I've answered at WT:ACTOR. --Amalthea 13:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hi, Amalthea. Thank you for your comment at ANI. I am dismayed to see that of the five administrators who responded, only you have interpreted CSD correctly. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		To Amalthea, for appropriate application of policy. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

That really shouldn't be worth a barnstar. :\
I can understand your frustration, FWIW. That really didn't go down how it was supposed to, from the first tag over deletion and DRV to the ANI discussion. The A3 tag was technically correct, but unnecessary since it was obviously a work in progress by an editor who has been here a fair while. It's sad having to recommend starting articles in userspace, but that's currently how it is, despite efforts of a number of people to discourage early A1, A3, A7, ... tags. I actually recommend established editors to place an {{underconstruction}} tag on the page if the first draft is a substub. If such an article is seen as an earnest start (i.e. it's not just a link to a company homepage) a lot of taggers give those the leeway they deserve (and which should be a matter of course).
Cheers, Amalthea 12:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Ali Moeen Nawaz-ish

Hi there! Thanks for the support on my talk-page on this article. --GedUK  06:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't mention it, that's what TPS are for. ;) --Amalthea 08:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Well

Amalthea, I would like to ask you a couple of questions. The deepblue (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Shoot. --Amalthea 12:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Popups

Have you been able to use your popup.js script to access popups on a remote wiki? I'd love to be able to borrow that, if it works! --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Having popups on one of your own wikis? Sure. The easiest way is to place

function siteArticlePath(){ return 'wiki'; }
function siteBotInterfacePath(){ return 'w'; }

document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' 
             + 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ALupin/popups.js' 
             + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s&popupUseQueryInterface=false;"></script>');

in your site's javascript, either in a user's skin js, or directly in the site's MediaWiki:Common.js or MediaWiki:Monobook.js. You might need to set $wgAllowUserJs = true; in your LocalSettings.php if you want to place it in user js.
Also, you'll possibly need to change the constants in siteArticlePath and siteBotInterfacePath to whatever your wiki is using (yes, popups could really be smart enough to pull that from wgArticlePath and wgScriptPath these days).
The way I've done it previously is to copy the content of MediaWiki:Gadget-popups.js into my MediaWiki:Common.js and copy MediaWiki:Gadget-navpop.css into my local MediaWiki:Common.css. That way, all users will have popups automatically installed (might not work with all skins though), and I don't have to load the javascript from wikipedia.org. The important thing is that if you copy it over, you still must define the two functions from above in the script, e.g. at the very end.
Is that enough to get you going? Amalthea 14:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

A bit more than enough, actually, I was just trying to figure out how to install popups for my account on another wiki. Copying your popups.js seems to do the trick just fine. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, good. I'll keep the above for reference then. :) --Amalthea 17:18, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Disambigs

This is turning out to be a bigger mess than I thought. There are a lot of redirects in the Template: namespace that aren't currently listed on MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage. I hope to have a more complete list in a couple of hours. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't really surprise me. Are you getting the template titles from the API, or do you have a toolserver account? Or are you using one of the larger database dumps? I notice http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/latest/ only offers the ns-0 titles in a convenient format. --Amalthea 16:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Through the API. Getting the redirects to a small list of template names is very simple and cheap. The harder part, which I haven't bitten off yet, is to see if there are actual disambig templates (as opposed to redirects) that are missing from the MediaWiki: page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Actor

Hi. You do realise that by removing the awards section by "consensus" who have created a huge mess in the editing space that means it will all have to be removed. Did you stop to consider who is going to do the clean up? Dr. Blofeld <sup>White cat</sup> 17:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you still in that discussion? From this edit of yours where you removed 9k of your comments (and some replies by others) and left the thread in a state where parts don't make sense I figured you don't care anymore?
Superfluous parameters in templates aren't a big deal. They aren't hurting the article, and if anyone cares to clean them up they can AWB through all usages of the template.
Amalthea 17:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Popups edit summaries

Hi, the change you made to User:Lupin/popups.js apparently broke something. When reverting, the edit summary says "Revert to revision $1 dated $2 by $3". MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Nah, that's an old bug, see for example diff from November last year. I don't think anyone has ever looked into it though. Seems to be a "random" thing, I know that it previously happened to me, but it worked a minute ago.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, see WT:Tools/Navigation popups#Revert edit summary bug is back though. --Amalthea 21:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I did five reverts, and every one of them had the error. Then I copied the code from User:Lupin/popups.js as of 14 March 2009, just prior to your last revision, into my user space and installed it. I added my name to the edit summary it leaves, just to indicate that it's my copy being used. All three tests worked perfectly. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Apparently that's an interference with User:Lupin/recent2.js then, I just tested your monobook and also got the error, but once I removed User:Lupin/recent2.js it seemed to work again.
Hmm, I'd assume that the gadget version would work together with User:Lupin/recent2.js but I haven't tested it.
Amalthea 00:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

the picture in Islamic calendar

what is the importance of this image in Islamic calendar article.I think it has no relation with the islamic calendar.please remove it.--Moda yahia (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi.
Hmm, someone removed parts of the image caption at some point. The image is apparently an illustration of Muhammad prohibiting intercalation, and as such is used to illustrate the Islamic calendar#Annulling intercalation section. You're quite correct that as it was, it didn't make much sense.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I still think it is not important in Islamic calendar#Annulling intercalation.I think it should be removed.--Moda yahia (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

You'll notice that it wasn't me who restored the image this time, so apparently I'm not alone in thinking that it is a useful illustration. Could I ask you to start a discussion about it at Talk:Islamic calendar instead of removing it again?
Thank you, Amalthea 09:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Your test7 page

Hi Amalthea, I've been deleting some of the G6 speedies from an FAC reorganisation and as a result you have some redlinks on your test7 page. If you want to know where they've gone just add archive1 as per Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Friedrich Nietzsche/archive1. If you've got an issue with these redirects going please drop me a line. ϢereSpielChequers 10:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I had just collected them there from CAT:CSD to start a Twinkle batch delete, but thought to ask first at WT:FAC. Since a couple of minutes later most had been deleted already that was kind of moot. Cheers, and thanks for asking, Amalthea 11:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I've just deleted the remaining ones, FWIW. --Amalthea 11:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, twinkle batch delete sounds like an interesting tool. Not one I'm likely to explore till I've got a lot more experience, but interesting to know such things exist. ϢereSpielChequers 11:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Re:Colour Analysis Edit

I did not replace the article with my version, I simply corrected two points, the winter and summer colours were confused with one another, I CORRECTED not "replaced" those wrong points. Now replace your wrong version with my correct version. I suggest that you do your research in future before supposedly correcting a professional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.111.203.28 (talk) 17:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

You must have started out with an outdated version then. If I compare the version of last July with your changed version from Friday, the only difference is to the winter and summer section – see here. However, there's been a lot of change to the article since July 2008, so your edit discarded all of those.
Since there've been only minor changes to the two sections you fixed, I could merge the two versions, so your changes from Friday are now part of the article.
Regards, Amalthea 20:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, it was just really bugging me.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.111.203.28 (talk) 10:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle and template taggings

Hi there Amalthea. I just noticed another time that someone added a db-tag to a template using Twinkle but Twinkle didn't add the needed <noinclude>-tags to it. Do you think it would be possible to make Twinkle use those tags when tagging templates with db-tags? Regards SoWhy 19:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Easily. That won't work with userboxes in user space though, unless we SD tags in all namespaces. Oh, and the speedy-decline script that I remember you asked someone to develop should also remove those wrapping tags then.
Amalthea 20:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I asked Animum (talk · contribs) but I'm not sure whether he has started on that already. I'll point it out to him if needed. Regards SoWhy 20:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Done for all SD tags in template space. Cheers, Amalthea 10:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Business FAQ

Hi Robert
I'd like to preemptively make you aware of our Business FAQ. I noticed you started an article on your company, accidentally in the wrong place, which you undid yourself. If the text had been added as an article however that it would have been promptly deleted, since it was purely promotional and didn't say why the company might be notable for encyclopaedic inclusion.
If you have questions, feel free to ask.
Cheers, Amalthea 11:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea,

Thank you for getting in touch, I'd really like to have a short page on Wikipedia about the company 'Mocean', please can you advise me on how I could achieve this without it being deemed promotional? We are unique in that we use primarily natural and recycled materials to make our products, and we support environmental charities. Will it just be the case of waiting until we are as big as Rip Curl before we can write anything about our company - even it is purely fact based - or is there a way we could have some basic information up here regarding what we do?

Best regards,

Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert.Wace (talk • contribs) 12:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

To quote from the FAQ:

"Wikipedia has inclusion standards for organizations and companies: see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). The basic requirement is that multiple independent sources must have written non-trivial amounts of information about a company before a Wikipedia article on that company is appropriate." (see WP:BFAQ#WHY)

From a glance, I couldn't find anything via google about your company, so at this point I don't see that it passes this inclusion guideline. Do you know any newspaper articles or the like that cover it in-depth?
Amalthea 13:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea,

Thank you for your response - our webpage will be up within a couple of weeks and the company will soon be featured in some newspapers and magazines so I will get back in touch once I have achieved this.

Thanks again, Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert.Wace (talk • contribs) 11:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

{{Include-USGov}}

Hi, Amalthea. I'm busy with non-wiki stuff, so haven't had a chance to make a cogent response. I'll respond in the next day or so. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 16:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. --Amalthea 16:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

intutive date templates- advice needed

I saw no note from you after your Yikes statement when you saw the length of the MOSNUM thread on plain text dates. My plan is to collaborate on creation of a concise and neutral summary for an RFC. Unfortunately, due to the relationship with many of the issues being dealt with by arbcom on autoformating and date linking, it is unclear to me when this RFC can go out. Doesn't that make sense? The main thing I'd like to hear from the RFC is whether contributors should be allowed to use the plain text versions of the date templates, and expect that such usage not be converted to the numeric version. For that, all POVs pro and con have to be covered fairly, and some arguments relate to formatting of dates.

I am very new to this. How is this sort of thing usually done? Would I host a draft summary on my personal web page and invite participation, or would it be as a subpage to MOSNUM? -J JMesserly (talk) 19:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

John, I admittedly still haven't read the rest of the thread there, so I can't really give an informed opinion..
If you want to go ahead with an RfC already, I would suggest that you prepare it in some sandbox of yours, and ask someone in opposition to review it before you put it live, and word the opposing arguments, so that you can be sure it is as neutral as possible, and the arguments in opposition are well represented. Only bring it live once you are both happy with it. Also, I notice that you have been quite vocal about the issue, and brought it up at some other user talk pages. You should be careful about that since this is easily going to backfire. If you want to advertise it, post a note at WP:VPP and possibly at {{CENT}}. Too late for the current discussion though.
Instructions about RfCs can be found at WP:RFC, of course. You'll typically just start it at WT:MOSNUM, and if it's getting too big someone will move it to a subpage eventually.
I don't really see the issue with date formatting and date linking. All concerns about linked dates in the template apply equally to article prose, so it's not a problem of the template. Dito incorrectly formatted dates. If you want to make sure, you can drop either User:Ryan Postlethwaite, User:Tiptoety or User:Jayvdb a note prior to bringing it live, the arb and clerks associated with the RfAr. But I wouldn't worry.
Lastly, FWIW, I'd say that both templates should probably simply be merged into one which accepts both forms. Everything else would be too complicated and confusing to use.
OK, I'll try to stay on top of it, please keep me informed, and once I've read the thread I'll post another note at WT:MOSNUM.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I have been mucking with a draft already. As you will see from the thread, there was common ground for a merge, but due to opposition that there be any plain text syntax whatever, the proposal died. If you start to work through examples of users employing merged templates, it should be noted that merging will also introduce confusion, since it would have to be made clear to users that they either have to use "numeric mode" syntax or "plain text". If there were not distinct modes you would have situations like the following: For templates like {{death date and age}} that require both birth and death date, what if contributor A specifies dates in numeric format and then contributor B comes along and adds a corrected death date in plain text format? Should the template ignore the numeric death date or the plain text death date parameter? Paradigm conflicts: The plain text templates mirror wikitext links. The optional right hand parameter is like the display text for a link. The numeric templates don't have this wysiwyg way of knowing what format the user wanted, so the user must set the df parameter. Is the df parameter valid in plain text mode? That is, if a merged template allows both, then does the template accept the right hand display parameter, or does it ignore that and format the date according to the df parameter? If there are two syntax modes then the documentation essentially has to be bifurcated, if they are not, then you will inevitably have usage that mixes the two syntaxes, and the documentation will have to specify what happens when parameters contradict each other. In addition, the template coding becomes unwieldy, since templates don't have a way of parsing strings, and it will be difficult to distinguish whether elements are in fact plain text or numeric parameters. -J JMesserly (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I meant the Arbcom ruling will likely alter the context of the comments received. For example, if the only real value of the date templates is that they emit microformat dates, that would quickly become a secondary goal if some sort of date formatting was allowed. It is likely that whatever the mechanism is, if it uses wikitext it would be re installed in the date templates, since date linking was their initial reason for existence. Another example, if arbcom rules as anderson has been advocating that MOS guidelines have no teeth, then the meaning of the MOS wording would be much less important, and folks would be more willing to go along with alternate wordings. -J JMesserly (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

You, Amalthea, have just been awarded The New Mikemoral's generic barnstar in miniature. You can earn this award too for other generic things, just like Amalthea did.

Thanks, and sorry for the unintentional error. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 22:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Amalthea 22:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Korean sentiment

Anti-Korean sentiment should be indef semi-protect, it receives a large number of unconstructive edits from IPs, especially 2channel socks. Prior to the recent dispute, the article was indef semi-protected since mid 2008, as it may be a contraversial topic, with many people with differing beliefs, some verging on the side of nationalism. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 03:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I've replied at the talk page there. --Amalthea 22:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle and preventing it automatically deleting redirects

I know you're good with this stuff, so I hoped you might be able to take a look at Wikipedia talk:TW#d-batch : option to not delete redirects. –xeno <sup>talk</sup> 21:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. I wonder how often you'll encounter batch history merges, but it's certainly a useful option, not least because Twinkle doesn't check the history of the deleted pages anyway so those deletions tend to be dangerous. Cheers, Amalthea 22:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yea, to be honest, I doubt I'll ever need to do that again, but you never know. =) Thanks for your quick attention to this. –xeno <sup>talk</sup> 00:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For deciphering my mess of a monobook.js, fixing a bunch of scripts that never worked for some reason I couldn't figure out and this in general, all the while resisting the urge to not call me an idiot, which would have been well-deserved on my part. Thanks :D Closedmouth (talk) 13:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Anytime! Amalthea 16:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

You are an angel for doing the editnotice at the Lara Croft article. Can we do it for some more other articles? --TudorTulok (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd be willing if you can point me to an (implicit or explicit) consensus to use British English in an article, and where the article has a history of that spelling being "corrected".
I'd rather not use edit notices inflationary, but only where there is a recurring problem. If overused, editors will soon extend their banner blindness to them.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Another award

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For your help debugging and improving Sambot's undecial[9] function, I award you this token of appreciation. – Quadell (talk) 00:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

1.^ Sounds better than "eleventh", doesn't it?<sup>[10]</sup>

2.^ Hmm, I don't know. Sounds wrong? But thanks, anyway. :) --Amalthea 12:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hyperforeignisms for fun and profit! – Quadell <sup>(talk)</sup> 13:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Your recent edits

Hello, you recently expressed some concern in some of my recent edits.

The Women's American Football article was edited because it appeared that the photograph was referring to the male quarterback as a female and hence an attempted insult towards the individual; coincidentally having a female name 'Donna'. After closer examination, it appears that the Defensive end was in fact the female, but it was slightly difficult to discern as the equipment and masculine features somewhat mask the gender.

I felt that user: radiant chains was being snide towards me, saying such items as "Welcome to Wikipedia!", offensive because I've been a registered user and frequent editor since 2006. Furthermore, he has unjustly submitted a deletion request against an article I created, so I took the liberty of reverting some of his edits that I felt were incorrect.

Do not accuse me of sinister activity, as I am only here to better Wikipedia with my wealth of knowledge. However, at the same time, I will not take vulgarity towards myself or my work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloodknight (talk • contribs) 00:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not accusing you of sinister activity. I expressed my concerns about your rather hostile posts on Radiant chains's user and user talk page, while he didn't do anything wrong. Concerning the song article, Wikipedia has rather strict guidelines about which songs should have a standalone article, which is laid out at WP:NSONGS. As you can see in the AfD, this guideline is still backed up by consensus of the editors here. He could have approached you first with his concerns, but most probably it wouldn't have changed anything. Retaliating by undoing his edits in turn is really not going to help anybody.
Amalthea 11:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle Bugs

I would like you to re-vise the case closure of my bug report on Twinkle - on the information that my account is auto-confirmed - therefore the conclusion it's a twinkle bug which is now becoming extremely inconvenient in it's restriction of my anti-vandalism activities. I would be most appreaciative if you could assist me in this matter.

Wikipedian2 (talk) 17:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I've answered at WP:TW/BUG#286. Cheers, Amalthea 11:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

{{puic}}

Hi! Sambot 11 is now up and running, so if you want to turn off automatic tagging in Twinkle, now would be a great time :-) Thanks for your help with the code. [[Sam Korn]] <sup>(smoddy)</sup> 11:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 11:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I've moved your question to my talkpage, to avoid the bot stopping every time either of us posts anything :-) [[Sam Korn]] <sup>(smoddy)</sup> 14:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Bad image list

Good idea. Now why didn't I thought of that. :) Garion96 (talk) 23:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

:)
Yeah, this list is getting a bit long, and if we don't want to end up having all of commons:Category:Nudity and commons:Category:Feces in it I guess putting expiry dates into the comments is necessary.
Cheers, Amalthea 00:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at Radiant chains's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Radiant chains (talk) 07:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Lovetolovecraig

You seem to have reverted quite a lot of this editor's edits; you might be interested in my SPI report of this editor ;-) Cheers, This flag once was red<sup>propaganda</sup><sub>deeds</sub> 13:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I was on my way to notify you about that user when I saw that you had already filed a CU request. :) --Amalthea 13:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

CSD decline script

Hi there. Seeing your talent with scripting and Animum's apparent lack of time to work on it, would you consider creating that CSD decline script I was fantasizing about? Regards SoWhy 13:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I won't make you any promises as to when I get it done, but I'll put it on my short-term to-do list, and will drop Animum a line when I start working on it. Amalthea 13:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it would be great, if you could but I won't lose (much) sleep over it if it takes a bit. Here's my original request to Animum and here's a list of some things I'd like it to do. TIA SoWhy 13:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

If this materializes let me know... ---I'm Spartacus! <sup>NO! I'm Spartacus!</sup> 21:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

OK. Funny how things turn out, you're doing far more CSD work than me. :) Amalthea 21:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It still doesnt work

My username still won't show up. I will not be able to answer immediatly. Abce2

What do you mean, "still"?
You can always go to your preferences, uncheck the "Raw signature" checkbox and blank the associated textbox, and you'll be back to the default. Amalthea 12:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I changed the code I've left on your page, could you try again please? Amalthea 16:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Again

It still does not work. What am I doing wrong? --[[User:Abce2|<font face=Fantasy color=#36F>Abce2</font>]]|<small>[[User Talk:Abce2|<font face=Verdana color=#09A>''How''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Abce2|<font face=Fantasy color=#FA1>''dy!''</font>]]</small> (talk) 21:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing you've left "Raw signature" unchecked? Amalthea 21:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And you're not using the code I corrected above, with the font face and colors enclosed in quotes. Amalthea 21:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm still confused. I used the code but it did not work. Abce2

Yes!!!!!!!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for helping me with my signature, whitch finally works. Thank you!!--Abce2|Howdy! 23:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy Amalthea's Day!

User:Amalthea has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Amalthea's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Amalthea! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. Und Ausgezeichnet! — Rlevse • Talk • 01:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, how nice! But that can't be right, there are far, far more awsome editors here than me. Amalthea 10:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Stop being so modest about yourself, you earned it many times over SoWhy 10:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Unprotecton

Hey, could you unprotect my user page. I'm willing to take the vandalisim.--Abce2|Howdy! 21:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It's your page, but it's a very bad idea at the moment. Playing whack-a-mole with him just because is not going to help defuse the situation. Amalthea 22:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle bug

this, sorry about that, I swear that I looked to see if it was already listed. Perhaps I am going crazy? Either way, thanks for fixing that bug.--Terrillja <sub>talk</sub> 15:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. As a matter of fact, you made me fix it more quickly since I missed the first bug report on my watchlist. :) Amalthea 15:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Saw here that you're helping to deal with my troll. Thanks so much because I'm offline during the day, New York time, and never manage to keep up. I'm semi'ed for a while at the moment, but he's trolling others. Still can't believe how long this insanity is is going over what semi-started with bad CSDs. I say semi - I think Yourname was a sock. StarM 00:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, anytime. :) Cheers, Amalthea 08:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Title replacing

Hi there Amalthea. Remember the discussion we had about replacing the page title on user pages? It seems like One (talk · contribs) managed to create a working version for text-only (see User:One/Title). Just fyi. =) Regards SoWhy 16:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but it's using CSS to roughly position the text div on top of the real title header, and look how it makes your talkpage look in modern skin. :| Amalthea 22:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

But who is really using modern skin nowadays? ;-) But seriously, I wish the software had an option to display stuff only on a certain skin... SoWhy 07:17, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Not me, but there are some, apparently.
And I'm afraid that a feature like this would lead to very questionable use (and I think it'd be hard to prevent its use in main space for all browsers) :) Amalthea 08:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Nicole "Hoopz" Alexander Sextape/Pictures

Video and images began circulating today. I really don't care that you deleted my edits, but it's out there so i won't be the last to contribute this info.

http://www.hithiphop.com/?p=5699

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP2_5nPZLP0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pimpinmane (talk • contribs) 01:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the links. You were already proven right, but based on that information we really can't add it to the article at this point. It needs to be picked up by one or two respectable news sites first
Thank you, Amalthea 08:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pimpinmane (talk • contribs) 11:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

BARNSTAR

		The Original Barnstar
		This Barnstar is awarded to Amalthea for her changes to the MediaWiki talk:Newarticletext‎, letting new editors know that userfication is an option. Your dedication to the project and to helping new users is extremely commendable. THANK YOU SO MUCH! Ikip (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

		The Helping Hand Barnstar
		The Helping Hand Barnstar is to be awarded to users who frequently help new users. This Barnstar is awarded to Amalthea, because one barnstar is not enough :) With 76.5% of articles nominated for deletion Articles for deletion are created by new users the changes you made to MediaWiki talk:Newarticletext‎ will help new editors immensely, and hopefully retain new editors. Thanks for your valiant efforts. Ikip (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I like to keep conversations in one place, I have watched your page, so please respond here, thanks. Ikip (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, just doing my job. Thanks, Amalthea 17:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome :) Ikip (talk)

World

Nothing but a orange with all of its element —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.255.180.130 (talk) 17:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

OK. Amalthea 18:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

ARBAMC2

I saw the redirects' fixings you did. I am not really sure if they are covered by this. Stricto sensu maybe not. But ... --Yannismarou (talk) 17:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. After the first four I did remember that there was an injunction in that area and I looked it up, but decided that it wasn't covered, and that it would be against all commons sense to leave a double redirect broken because of it; They all lead to Macedonia anyway, only with a stopover at Republic of Macedonia. If you disagree or think that it might I'm happy to bring it to attention at some forum though.
Cheers, Amalthea 18:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Holly Combs

Thanks. I didn't see the other edit. I fixed the reference. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 11:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Amalthea 11:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Courtney Love

Hello Ameltha, how are you? About Courtney Love's backround i have sourced the information in the past, but honestly i do find it hard to believe that she would just make up something like that, unless, of course, she was missquoted, but if a problem seems to rise, i will try and discuss it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.173.210.223 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you please leave at least a comment at the talk page of the article anyway? I'd expect that some other editor, or All Hallow's Wraith, might otherwise just undo it with the comment that it doesn't say anything about her heritage in the article, only about her claims of her heritage. And I couldn't fault them for that. As I said, it appears sound that if none of her parents are of Jewish ancestry, that she can't be either. I haven't tried investigating any of it myself, but it's quite possible that the was misquoted, or the quote was misinterpreted, or that she was speaking metaphorically, or ...
Cheers, Amalthea 12:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)