User talk:Anthony Appleyard/2009/January-March

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


Game Boy Printer histmerge request

  • Can I ask why the request for a history merge of Game Boy Printer was denied? This was done in an attempt to clean up the WP:VG subspace, and the discussion was the only attempt to nominate an article through a failed collaboration project. As the small vote would only have relevance to Game Boy Printer, and as that discussion came before any other on Talk:Game Boy Printer, in my mind it makes sense to combine them. A cut-and-paste merge is possible, but is imperfect. I know of no policies against this sort of history merge, and I don't see the downside, so I am just hoping for clarification. This was not proposed as an attempt to fix a mistake, just as an attempt to consolidate WP space. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 10:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
  • See the first entry in Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen/Archive 2#Requests rejected December 2008. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
  • That is the link I listed above. :) I just don't know what's wrong with it. There is very little overlap, and they are two very small pages about the same thing. It's not a big deal, but I wonder why it is not acceptable, or what negative consequence it could have. I understand that histmerge is used for cut-and-paste moves, but is it not-ever-acceptable for situations like this? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 10:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
  • If two pages have parallel histories, histmerging them shuffles the edits of both pages together into one list, causing confusion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I see that, I guess I just assumed it wouldn't be an issue with so few edits overlapping... Okay, thanks for responding. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 10:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

deleted "Matthew Langton"

  • 11:45, 4 January 2009 Anthony Appleyard (Talk | contribs) deleted "Matthew Langton" ‎ (NN)
    Hello, I don't seem to understand why this has been deleted. This is my first article and I thought I had respected all the guidelines. Any additional information you can provide would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
    Anttot (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
  • FYI, it appears the article has been re-created at Matthew langton, presumably failing notability like the previous article. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 18:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Someone moved Matthew langton to Matthew Langton, which is under AfD. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Article in New Pages; unsure of notability

  • Can you please take a look at the Movement Mgzn if you have time. I'm not sure it's notable enough but I didn't want to tag it for speedy or mark it as patrolled. Thanks. §FreeRangeFrog 06:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I have tagged it {{db-spam}}. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


Themes in science fiction

See Talk:List of science fiction themes#What to include? for more discussion on this topic.
  • Hi, i noticed that a long while back you did a minor edit on Themes in science fiction. As one of very few admins to have looked at the page, could you check out the talk page and the recent reverting of edits? An editor there keeps reverting all my work to an older version, which removes all the citations and improvement templates and navbox etc.
    This editor refuses to discuss any changes on talk, and claims to have "retired" for WP, only popping up to revert this page and add uncited stuff to a few other articles, and to remove warnings for doing such from his talk page (from myself and others).

The page was already semi-protected after the editor retired to stop him using IP addresses with personal attack edit summaries there - is it possible to make him discuss changes, or block him if he continues in this vein? I cannot work on adding more cites if all my work disappears every other day! :-/. Thanks for your attention.Yobmod (talk) 09:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Someone moved Themes in science fiction moved to List of science fiction themes. I have merged your and User:AKR619's last versions. Please, both of you, discuss any deletions first. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • In User talk:AKR619, I undeleted and archived the old deleted matter. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Erm, you caused the loss of all the work done on splitting subarticles out, like stock characters. What is the point of having an entirely cited subarticle, and an uncited OR list of stock characters here? And you re-added all the original research that i tagged and removed after no sources were found (over a period of months). Tagging and removal is policy, no? Discussion is impossible because AKR619 refused to post on the talk page, and admins ignore guidelines on dispute resolution :-/ Yobmod (talk) 12:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I have left a message in User talk:AKR619. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Here is a list of AKR619's edits. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, thanks for trying to initiate more discussion, there is now a lot more activity on the tlak page that can point the way for a consensus. It's unfortunate that this user got blocked, but i see it was for similar activity over a number of pages, and insulting the blocking admin, so seems inevitable. Thanks again for taking the time to check on the page; I already started adding cites, now that it shouldbe more stable for a while.Yobmod (talk) 08:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Hmm, as soon as the block expired, AKR619 has gone back to reverting without discusion. The 10 citations i added from a reliable source were therefore a waste of time, and inviting people to build a consensus doesn't seem to stop a rogue editor in any way. Could you use your admin power to force this user to abide by the consensus we built there? Every editor has said citations are needed, and certainly no-one supports removing the citation that are already there. But i am not going to continue with adding more if they will be removed - i thought WP:verify was a policy, but breaking it seems to cause no reaction from anyone! Do i have to make a loud fuss somewhere official? The article simply cannot progress in the current climate :-(.Yobmod (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks for helping out. I guess this must be the most annoying part of admin responsibilities! But did you see his last edits? He cited everything with a wikilink to the general Star Trek and Doctor Who page and with "If you need a reference for this one, you must have only just heard of science fiction" (and this was after you had reverted once already). This may not count as obvious vandelism, but it definitely intended to be distuptive - there is no way that he doesn't know that this would never be reliable sources.
    And the edit summaries continue to be ponty and unincivil: "Once upon a time this article had all these things with no complaints, then Yobmod fucked it all up, well now I'm fucking it the way it was used to be". "I'm pulling a Yobmod, when most of the previous users agreed to one format, he insisted on changing it back and wouldn't slide".Yobmod (talk) 08:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Repairing moves of many templates

  • Before making a formal request, I thought I'd post here and ask advice for the best way to proceed.
A couple of days ago, a relatively new user, User:Solphusion, made good faith moves of over fifty automotive navigation templates in an effort to "standardize" the naming of them. Unfortunately, several issues arose from this, which have subsequently been discussed at the WP:CARS talk page. The general consensus was to restore them to their original locations, but unfortunately the user had made multiple moves of most of them, and redirect bots moved in before they could be undone.
At the WP:CARS talk page there's a table compiled of all the moves. Three of the templates are at improved locations: {{Audi vehicles timeline (Europe)}}, {{Audi vehicles timeline (North America)}}, and {{Honda vehicles timeline (North America)}}. About nine more have been reverted successfully, and are indicated in bold text. The remainder are stuck in their new locations—so that's about 40 or so which still need shifted.
What would you suggest be the best way to get these undone? Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 09:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello again—been away from the PC all weekend, so only getting around to this now. There were a few templates that had only been moved once, so after I reverted them there's only (sic) 20 which require admin assistance. I've listed them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#List of outstanding templates to be reverted to their original location.
Thanks very much for all the assistance. --DeLarge (talk) 23:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

NN blog

  • Dear Anthony Appleyard,
    I would like to write an entry for the art blog "Two Coats of Paint," apparently there was one but it has been deleted. I believe that whoever posted that entry was either not aware of guidelines or did not understand the blog's notability in the press. Not only has this blog been covered in magazines and newspapers, but Sharon Butler is a noted painter and critic for the Brooklyn Rail and American Prospect, as well as faculty at Eastern Connecticut University. I did not see what was deleted, so cannot respond to what was up there, but I would like to redress this.
    Sincerely, Emptyhandedseigen. 18:42, 9 January 2009 User:Emptyhandedseigen
  • If you think that this blog is notable, write a new full article about and see if it survives AfD. See WP:NN.
    Please sign your articles with ~~~~ (4 tildes): that will automatically turn into the date and time and your Wikipedia signature. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Page Two Coats of Paint has been recreated and someone AfD'ed it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two Coats of Paint. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Imperial (band) removed

  • Just wondering why my page was removed. I am in the band and sited various sites to confirm my information. I even asked on the discussion page what could be done to make it more appropriate for wikipedia after it was flagged. I am confused due to our label and labelmates having wiki pages. why hasnt theirs come down? Thanks for any assistance you may offer regarding this. Imperialrock (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I have undeleted it and AfD'ed it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imperial (band). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re LGBT episodes table

North Albanian Alps

  • When Vanjagenije, Nikola Smolenski and Tadija requested a move to Prokletije they had not included a source on the number of hits on Google for North Albanian Alps.
    The above link produces 244.000 hits for North Albanian Alps.
    Thus I would like to request that you move the article back to North Albanian Alps title
    Also I would like to point out that even if the three users presumably had no intent to deceive, that they should be warned not to use the Wikipedia as a battleground for their countries' honour since we do not live in the 19th century any more.
    Imbris (talk) 23:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
  • See Talk:Prokletije and please continue this discussion there. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


  • Hi, Anthony. I assume you read my arguments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conquer the World favor of just redirecting the page (without deleting it). Am I missing something, is it really necessary to delete the pages in cases like this? Thanks, Waldir talk 16:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Page Conquer the World has been deleted and rerdirected to World domination (disambiguation). The reasons are stated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conquer the World. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
    • As a Third Opinion here, I have to say that I see no reasoning from you at all in the closure of that discussion, merely the boilerplate {{afd top}} text. When people ask you for your reasons as a closing administrator, please give them. "The result was delete" is not an explanation of how that result was determined. (And, looking at the discussion, it does appear that you are on shaky ground on that. Only two editors wanted outright deletion, and even one of them did so on notability grounds, for which merger is a perfectly acceptable, and indeed recommended and explicitly mentioned in deletion policy, course of action for non-notable subjects that are better dealt with in broader contexts.) A boilerplate closure is not an explanation, and pointing to a boilerplate closure is not an explanation, either.

      And the deletion policy-based answer to Waldir's question is "No, it isn't necessary.". Uncle G (talk) 12:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I went to merge it to List of MicroProse games, but everything that was in Conquer the World was also in List of MicroProse games. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


  • Can you tell me why Inshore and Insure are in the Ensure article? They have no significance other than being words. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. PotentialDanger (talk) 00:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
  • The hatlinks say why. They are pronounced the same or nearly so, and English is not the first language of some of the people who consult Wikipedia for information, and they may well be confused as to which word is spelled how. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Just because they are words that are spelled or pronounced similarly does not mean they need to be included in the article, and Insure is the only one that should stay in the wiki as a redirect to Insurance. For example, Shown does not have a link to Shone. Also, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, this is why Devestation does not have an article. It most likely would if there was a significant group, action, etc. PotentialDanger (talk) 23:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Wiben konstanten

  • Actually, it wasn't anywhere near expiring. It had been listed for about six and a half hours. You should check that you are seeing the dates on proposed deletion notices correctly. Uncle G (talk) 01:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
  • This was a short article in Danish about the fudge factor. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


I have had to recreate this category again, having spotted that it had been (again) deleted subsequent to being de-populated (again) by an anonymous vandal with an obscure grudge against the admirably knowledgable (sadly former) editor user:Bill Thayer. See User talk:, and in particular the anon editor’s threat: ‘Or i smash your face’.

Its members (currently (Bevagna, Cantalupo di Bevagna, Limigiano and Mevania)) are small places, but ones with historic and artistic importance. It is standard practice when an Italian municipality (comune) has articles on several of its so-called frazioni to group them in a municipal category.

Unfortunately when the admins (, user: Anthony Appleyard, user: Wizardman and user:Alexf) have previously deleted this category, they have been unwittingly perpetuating these acts of vandalism by the anon bully.

Ian Spackman (talk) 10:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Anthony for such prompt action! By the way, the anon does sometimes come in under other IPs. Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 10:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


Hi, Anthony. I replied on my talk page earlier, but forgot to drop you a line here. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 02:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Vacuum Arc Remelting

  • I was just going to move Vacuum Arc Remelting to disputed, because I found that it is sometimes capitalized. See the review at [1]. A Google search turns up both capitalizations in use,[2] in particular this link. [3] (talk) 16:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Have you excluded instances where the term "Vacuum Arc Remelting" occurs in an advertisement-type context? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I did not make any discrimination as to how it was used. The review of the book used both in the same sentence. I certainly pity anyone who wants to know which is correct. Now that it has been moved, it is unlikely that opening it for comment would make any difference. Perhaps someone will write a dictionary of technical terms and take a stance one way or another. (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

What's Following Me

  • I am writing concerining the What's Following Me page that was deleted for blatant copyright infrigment. I created this page at the request of Eleanor McEvoy who wrote and owns all rights to this album. I apologise for the problems; I am fairly new to Wikipedia so I am making mistakes as I learn the process. If you could help me fix these problems I could get the page back up.
    Thanks for you help in this matter. Also, I apoligise if I posted this twice - I thought I had already written but can not find the first post.
    Editthis2662 Editthis2662 (talk) 21:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
  • The page is What's Following Me?. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I may be misreading this, but I don't think Edit2662 is asserting ownership over the copied material. They state that McEvoy "wrote and owns all rights to this album". Additionally, there's more copyvio at Out There (Eleanor McEvoy album). Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for taking the time to help me out with this. I have a couple of questions. I was actually trying to create factual and impartial articles about Eleanor McEvoy. I guess my inexperience caused me to write them in a way that seems impartial. Would you suggest that I try re-writing each article with an eye toward making them impartial. Also all of the information I used from other websites are from organizations affiliated with Eleanor. I think it would be best to just rewrite anything that came from another source. Does this seem like the best approach to you?

Sorry to take so much of your time with this, but I really want to write these articles in the proper format.

Once again, thanks for your help. Editthis2662 (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

One more comment for tonight - I have created a new temporary article. Could you possibly check this to see if it meets the proper guidelines. If it does, how do I make it a permanent replacement. Thanks Editthis2662 (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

What's Following Me?, part 2

Hi. :) I've removed the "hangon" tag from the article, as it isn't nominated for speedy deletion (anymore) and the "hangon" tag is placing it in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. The copyright problems procedure, of course, won't complete for seven days, which gives plenty of time for this contributor to take additional steps to verify copyright permission at the external site or through the communications committee. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I think you deserve this!

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
With thanks for your tireless and oft unrecognised work fixing cut and paste moves! ukexpat (talk) 21:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't get it

  • How come an editor with so many barnstars just ingores a message from another user? I am assuming you let it slip by unnoticed or something.. Please respond to my previous message above. Cheers, Waldir talk 08:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  • See #delete+redirect. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleted: Integrated Research

  • I'm not sure why this page was tagged for deletion. The company is particularly notable for the work of it's founder Steve Killelea who created the Global Peace Index. I cant see why this page would qualify for speedy deletion yet NetIQ does not? --Arrans (talk) 10:17, 23 January 2009
  • It was speedy-delete-tagged "This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion. It does nothing but promote some entity and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion. See WP:CSD G11.". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:25, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I understand that it was tagged - i'd like to know why? Simply having a corporation as it's primary topic does not make an article a candidate for speedy deletion. The relevance of it's founder justifies it's significance. What other changes could be made to make this article "worthy" of an encyclopedic entry? --Arrans (talk) 10:28, 23 January 2009
  • I have undeleted it and AfD'e4d it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Integrated Research. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
  • It has been re-deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Integrated Research. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: Vettaikaaran

  • Yes, they are the same; Vettaikaran is protected against recreation. I have also filed a report at WP:ANI regarding the author's persistant recreation of this material. Can you not check the current article against the deleted ones? PC78 (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I did check Vettaikaaran against Vettaikaran, but I thought that I better get a second opinion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Remotely operated underwater vehicle

Category:FA-Class film festivals articles

  • Just wondering why you've deleted this category. Project categories such as this are not normally covered by CSD#C1, empty or not. PC78 (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • At 06:59, 24 January 2009 User:Skier Dude tagged it as {{db-catempty}}. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I've left a note on his talk page. Can you undelete it please? PC78 (talk) 13:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Rebreather links section

There's a discussion going on at the talk page of Rebreather about the recent addition and removal of links to the page. Themfromspace (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Please use the talk page of the article before editing against consensus again. I have reverted your edits and will keep out the links including therebreathersite until there is a consensus on the talk page to reinsert them. Themfromspace (talk) 14:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Luri language/disambig

  • I put in a Delete Request for page Luri language/disambig. I was turned down saying you were dealing with it. Do you require the page? If not, could you request the delete again. regards, JohnI (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • At 14:43, 20 January 2009 I obeyed a move request Lori dialects to Luri language. Luri language/disambig is the previous contents of Luri language which I moved out of the way; its history is composed only of old redirects and 2-way disambigs. I have deleted it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 18:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Appreciated. JohnI (talk) 17:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested Moves

  • Would you mind taking care of the WMRE (AM) to WMRE move, if you have the time. I would appreciate it. - NeutralHomerTalk • January 25, 2009 @ 07:09
  • Thank you kindly :) Much appreciated. Have a Good Weekend...NeutralHomerTalk • January 25, 2009 @ 07:19
  • One last thing: if there is any significant history that needs to be saved, perhaps a histmerge would be in order as the newly-named redirect will almost certainly be posted at RfD as an improbable search item. Thanks again. B.Wind (talk) 07:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • WMRE/version 2 is all redirs and 2-way disambigs added to WMRE after WMRE was moved to WMRE (AM). It is parallel with the end part of current WMRE which was WMRE (AM). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Shiny things and related

Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you, may you be armed with sodas 4eva.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection on mask?

  • I noticed you recently semi-protected mask indefinitely. I admit it sees some vandalism, but I personally question whether it rises to the level of needing semi-protection, particularly indefinite semi-protection. Is it possible I could talk you down from an indefinite semi to a few days or a week's worth of semi-protection? Let me know... SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done I changed its semiprotection to a week starting today. (Of its last 100 edits, most are IPA users alternating with reverts.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
And a month down the road, I'm now inclined to agree with your earlier decision about semi-ing it indefinitely. I hear crow is quite tasty these days... SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sir Thomas Bowyer, 1st Baronet

Heya ... thanks for your investigating and your effort. Regards

~~ Phoe talk ~~ 22:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Removing of Srebrenica request

  • Why have you remove the request??? The first discussion was before 2008 as the massacre was declarated as genocide! Take a look at the first 4 references of the article and please make your edit undo. --Seha (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
  • It was missing for a few seconds while I moved it to Wikipedia:Requested moves#31 January 2009. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Sorry i was too fast. Thanks --Seha (talk) 11:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Officer Ricky‎

  • It was vandalism from an now blocked user, and the information is from a source with a dubious reputation. Easily G3 vandalism. Secret account 16:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done: I have deleted page Officer Ricky‎. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


Talk:Precious Quigaman

I came across a speedy for this page. It appears you forgot to put the right version on top after merging histories. Please take more care in the future. See ya! - Mgm|(talk) 11:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Christ Church (Stevensville, Maryland)

Most excellent - thanks. I think that cleans up the project quite nicely. --User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 15:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Yasir Iqbal Randhawa

  • Please would you consider salting this page in view of the originator's persistence? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


With this move, you broke hundreds of links which ended up at the dab rather than the correct page, and left the band article with a redlink in the hatnote. The band article is the most popular article both on views and on incoming links - please see Talk:Mogwai#Moves for the history of the article and why the incoming links point at the band article. Black Kite 19:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Et in arcadia ego

Many thanks! Johnbod (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Johnbod recommends you as another adult I can come to with similar zany problems.--Wetman (talk) 00:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Yankee Stadium

  • Anthony, the disputed move is the one to Old Yankee Stadium, which was made without discussion. I am only asking that the undiscussed move be reverted, in line with the discussions on the talk page about leaving the old stadium at Yankee Stadium until a consensus is reached. Move protection on all tree articles would also prabably be a good thing. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 09:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  • It's supposed to say "all three articles". I'm too tired to keep this up. Hopefully the status quo will be restored by the time I wake up! - BillCJ (talk) 10:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  • See Talk:Old Yankee Stadium#Move? for the rest of this discussion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Anthony, thanks for restoring the status quo. I apologize for being "difficult". I was up far too late because of a chronic illness, and I handled the stress of the situation very poorly. I finally just had to make myself log off! Thanks again. - BillCJ (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for RM

Thank you for your quick action on RM for J. Bonnie Newman, a woman who sudden become a US Senator (is going to) who was virtually unknown last week. Chergles (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Marforio and the other talking statues

  • Sorry to call Help! so soon. An editor changed Marforio to the pretentiously obscure Marphorius. "Pasquin"could not be returned to Pasquino, Babuino is given the article Il Babuino as if it were a book title, and the others... No knowledgeable Wikipedia reader would find them under these titles. Preehaps not every illustration to an article needs to be given a frame like a 35mm color slide. The devil makes work for idle hands... Dealing with this with frankness would involve me in rude retorts and a Civility Tag, if the usual pattern holds.-Wetman (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done for Pasquino and Babuino. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for heeding my plea.--Wetman (talk) 23:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


  • I would like to protest the A3 deletion of this soft redirect. Soft redirects are not supposed to be subject to Article CSD reason deletions, but rather are subject to Redirect CSD reasons. - TexasAndroid (talk) 01:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I have undeleted Whoamg. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Undermountain

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Undermountain, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undermountain. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Mattinbgn\talk 03:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Fairway Market

Thanks for sorting out that hist merge - that all got terribly confusing yesterday! Gonzonoir (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:MVC-294F from great vase court.JPG

File:MVC-294F from great vase court.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:MVC-294F from great vase court.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:MVC-294F from great vase court.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Split (bowling)

Hi Anthony, I saw your vote at Talk:Split_(ten_pin_bowling)#Move.3F. I don't know if you saw my comments, and was wondering if you would reconsider - it has been relisted.

Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Jacket lapel

  • Dear Anthony, I see you added the picture of the boilersuit back again. I am still not convinced how useful it is however, for the same reasons I gave last time when removing it: firstly, jacket lapels do not derive from boilersuits (at the very least, show a period coat, like a frock, or dress coat); secondly, this is technically OR; finally, the picture is not a very well-shot one anyway. I would personally prefer if you removed it. Thanks, Kan8eDie (talk) 22:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  • As showing the origin of jacket lapels, it is not the best but it is better than nothing. I do not have access to old garments that you mention. If someone has a better equivalent image, let him upload it instead. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  • This discussion is continued at Talk:Jacket lapel#Boilersuit image Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk:TNA Against All Odds (2009)

  • It was not actually moved, someone just copied the talk page and then redirectd it. So I guess the histories just need to be merged. TJ Spyke 17:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
  • It was a text-merge of two talk tages. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


Hi Anthony, thanks for moving Charismatic Christianity. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 07:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

And thanks for moving Parkinson's Law too. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

User page vandalism

  • Hi there - just reverted some edits that blanked your user page, on the assumption that this was vandalism. If not, my apologies - thought I should let you know in any case. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Typo redirect Vejle, Danmark

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Vejle, Danmark, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Vejle, Danmark is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Vejle, Danmark, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

UFL History Merge


DNA section

Hi there, I removed this section I'm afraid, since in the overall view of DNA noting its use as a metaphor isn't really important enough to be noted in the main article on this molecule. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Aa butaneblowlamp.jpg and File:Aa irises at gauntlet.jpg

Just to let you know that I recently copied the above images that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons, the Wikimedia central media repository for all free media. The images had been tagged with the {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} template. Your images are now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:File:Aa butaneblowlamp.jpg and Commons:File:Aa irises at gauntlet.jpg. The original versions of the images uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD#I8. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

ASU move closure

Continued use of "Sir" in main title headers

Government of Massachusetts

Due to a bit of carelessness on my part and perhaps some weirdness with the WikiMedia software, we collided and both tried to perform the requested move of Massachusetts government to Government of Massachusetts. I went first but you repeated the move literally at the same time (to the minute anyway) as me. This caused a looping double redirect.

I think what happened was that you pulled up the article before I did the delete/move and then you did the delete/move again. The WikiMedia software did not check to see if what you were moving was what you had pulled up and so it just did the move again.

At first, I thought it strange that you were saying "Done" in WP:RM for something that I had done. Then, on reflection, I checked and saw what had happened. I see now that I should have left a note in WP:RM saying "I'm taking this one" which would have let others like you know that the move was being taken care of.

Just a little Wikipedia weirdness to brighten up your day.


--Richard (talk) 19:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)



  • This user Scarian is crazy, he is blaiming me for being Be Black Hole SUn, cna you talk to him, i'm not be black hole sun. Please admin,--This Feels Right2 (talk) 10:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks Anthony. A CU confirmed that TFR was BBHS. By the way, what do you think made TFR come and contact you? Did you have any past contact with BBHS? Thanks again and regards, ScarianCall me Pat! 10:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Perhaps he heard of me via move and histmerge requests. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:27, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ballachulish railway station

Thanks for performing the requested move. –Signalhead < T > 19:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Move request...

  1. John Ordronaux --> John Ordronaux (privateer)
  2. John Ordronaux (disambiguation) --> John Ordronaux

Hope this makes sense, thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 04:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done, except that I also brought the ship into the disambig. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Great thanks! – ukexpat (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Ditto, thanks from me, who wrote most of the two J.O. articles. Regards, Wfm495 (talk) 17:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for doing the work for me by taking care of "shalom bayit." Phil_burnstein (talk) 09:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


  • Hello. I notice you just moved EA (disambiguation) to EA based on a "uncontroversial" request. However, another admin concluded less than 3 weeks ago that there was no consensus for a move based on discussion at Talk:EA. I think this is in fact a controversial move. Station1 (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
  • The discussion in Talk:EA#Requested move is at least evens for "yes" to the move EA (disambiguation)EA. "EA", "Ea", "ea" have many meanings, and the many people who do not play videogames are much less likely to treat Electronic Arts as a dominant meaning. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't necessarily disagree with that argument -- in fact, although I followed the discussion about the proposed move, I didn't 'vote' because I wasn't sure if a strong enough case had been made for a primary meaning -- but the place for that argument is on the article's talk page. The fact that the 'votes' were "at least" even for yes indicates that there was not a consensus, which was the conclusion of another admin. My only point is that this should not have been listed on WP:RM as an uncontroversial move so soon after a completed discussion, and even though it was (wrongly) listed, I believe it shouldn't have been moved without discussion. Station1 (talk) 00:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

re:Accessing deleted pages

I replied on my talk page. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


Thank you for your help with Cronkhite-Canada syndrome. kilbad (talk) 03:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted UK & Ireland SAP User Group

AfD nomination of Tim Cotterill

Ambox warning pn.svg

Tim Cotterill, an article that you have contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Esasus (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for taking the time to do this history merge [4] on Lily (TV series). Regards. dissolvetalk 08:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Robert Nelson on mainpage

  • Robert Nelson (insurrectionist) was cut/paste to Robert Nelson over the disambiguation page. I reverted this edit and restored the original pages (no intermediate edits had occurred). However I note that the Wikipedia main page is pointing to the disambiguation page (on the right under 'On this day'). I have no idea about correcting links on the main page. In fact on double-checking there is no edit option available on the mainpage so obviously it's an admin job. I'd be grateful for your help. Thanks Tassedethe (talk) 08:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done, after ferreting through a tangle of tables and transcluded pages used as templates to find the right page to edit. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much. Tassedethe (talk) 11:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Histmerg of BootX (Apple)

  • I noticed you merged those articles for me, first off, thanks for that. I did notice that on BootX (Apple) I think you've forgotten to undelete some revisions before by copypasting to the userspace happened. If you have a look here here you can see that I am listed as the first revisions of the article when I am pretty sure I didn't create it. If it's impossible to fix then it doesn't really matter, but just thought I might give you a heads up anyway. Thanks again. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 09:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

A. J. Burnett

  • Is this batch of moves complete? Because if so, it ended up in the wrong form. A. J. Burnett was supposed to have been the page that ended up at Allen James Burnett (which was moved improperly in the first place). The weatherman was supposed to be left as a hat note. No disambiguation page is necessary between a well-known baseball player and a local weatherman. -Dewelar (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 18:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks! -Dewelar (talk) 18:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Redirect suppression

  • How do you move a page with the redirect suppressed? -- IRP 01:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • When an administrator calls page-move, these clickable yes/no options appear on the move options page:
    • Move associated talk page
    • Leave a redirect behind
    • Move subpages of talk page (up to 100), if applicable
    • Watch this page
    Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I guess that means in other words: only administrators can redirect a page without the previous title redirecting to it. Am I correct? -- IRP 07:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • If "Leave a redirect behind" does not appear, then it would seem so. The system has changed much since I became an admin. The "Leave a redirect behind" option started appearing in the last few weeks. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Why would it have to be restricted to administrators? -- IRP 07:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • That is policy decision from high-up :: I had no part in it. I have just asked about it in Wikipedia:Village pump. It is likely so that, after a page move by an inexperienced user, a redirect is always left behind, so people can easily find where the page has been moved to. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Moving without leaving a redirect behind is a feature which should rarely be used, and is used mostly in reverting vandal moves. This feature is one which couyld easily be abused, so it shouldn't be available to the general Wikipedian public. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WWLG History merge.

  • Hi, I noticed you started on that history merge. I don't know if you're done yet but it looks like you only moved the original page but didn't restore the current page so the edits from the last 2 years are gone. Thought I'd let you know in case you thought it was completed. Thanks. RobDe68 (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Thanks, there may be more where that came from. I've been going through many station pages looking to see if there was an improper move when the call sign changed and if it can be undone (many can't be fixed). RobDe68 (talk) 21:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Activation-synthesis hypothesis

Hey Anthony, thanks for your work on the Activation-synthesis hypothesis article. Musicaindustrial (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


Many thanks for the speedy move of this. Greyskinnedboy (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

not exactly sure here

Robert Lacy deletion

  • well, i kinda thought the William Kittredge quote implied notablilty:

    Robert Lacy's stories are direct, honest, grace-filled, and useful. The Natural Father is that good thing, a book that both sweetens and illuminates our lives. [5]

i take it, i can retry, when he gets his novel done. pohick (talk) 15:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Very Very complex history merge! (Possible?)


  • Hello Anthony.
    If we were to link a case study about Cetrus on an independent corporation's website would this give the article credibility?
    Thanks Cetrus (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  • What such external independent sites about Cetrus are there? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deleted page

  • A page I made for the 2005 WAC Men's Basketball Tournament was speedily deleted because it apparently didn't have enough context. However, it had no less content than the pages for the tournaments from 2006 and 2007, and the content that the other tournaments contained could have been placed if I had been given the opportunity. Why was only this page deleted?
    Also, I was away at the time the tag was placed and did not have time to contest the speedy deletion. KJS77 23:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  • As "a very short article lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. See CSD A1". I have undeleted it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Kangra painting/version 2 listed at RfD

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kangra painting/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the Kangra painting/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ekabhishek (talk) 11:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC) --Ekabhishek (talk) 11:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Net cutter

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Net cutter, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Net cutter. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Geronimo20 (talk) 11:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Al-Khalid tank move

  • Hi there, I noticed you moved the article title from Al-Khalid Main Battle Tank to Al-Khalid tank. Don't you think it would be more appropriate to move it either to "Al-Khalid (tank)" or "Al-Khalid MBT"? Hj108 (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
  • See long discussion in Talk:Al-Khalid tank#Requested move. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to commercial trawler

The contributions you keep making to commercial trawler are a form of harassment. If you want to contribute content to an article, please find a topic which you know something about, or at least research the topic before you add content. The contributions you have made to commercial trawler have been trivial, inappropriate or incorrect. --Geronimo20 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Which of my edits do you object to, and how? For example, my edit of 14:10, 12 March 2009 was merely changing the link Net cutters to the more specific Net cutter (fisheries patrol), as page Net cutter is now a disambig with 5 choices. And my two previous edits were minor alterations to image descriptors. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Well just to take your latest edit, where you added a reference to this statement of yours: "The need for drying sea clothes is shown by a notice in at least one steam trawler's boiler room saying "Do not dry oil frocks over the boiler"." Apart from being trivial, and apart from the fact that oil frocks are not used these days, you have inappropriately placed the comment in the section on modern trawlers. Modern trawlers are not steam trawlers. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:09, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Aa plazmablaster 00.jpg

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Aa plazmablaster 00.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image with an unknown source or an unknown copyright status which has been tagged as such for more than 7 days, and it still lacks the necessary information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:File:Aa plazmablaster 00.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Plrk (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

ACTRAN article deleted by mistake?

  • Dear Anthony, you have removed the article ACTRAN saying that it was blatant advertising, if I understood correctly. I am new in editing wikipedia articles, I may have done some errors without noticing it, in which case I apologize. But I have just read the guidelines again, and IMHO this judgment is a little excessive (or maybe my page was confusing?). If some lines were falling in the blatant advertising category and should be removed from wikipedia, I am of course open to modifications (that is the way wikipedia articles can progress!). What is the procedure to undelete the page, and what modifications would you demand / ask / propose? If you think it is not acceptable to undelete this page even after modifications, I would be happy to know why. A lot of other simulation tools are detailed in wikipedia, cf List_of_finite_element_software_packages for example, and I have tried to use them as a basis for my own page. Thanks a lot for your help, time and patience, and best regards, Fred SC (talk) 16:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I have undeleted it and AfD'ed it: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ACTRAN. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks, would you please be kind enough as to tell me, in your opinion, what the cause of the mark for deletion is? Fred SC (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
  • A user (not me) speedy-delete-tagged it as advertisement. I have AfD'ed it, and that will let several users' opinions be heard about whether to keep page ACTRAN. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
  • wonderful, thanks a lot, now I understand much better what happened; I have replied to the (valuable) comment of this user, and will wait for a feedback from the community, which will have the final word. I love this system. Thanks for your time and patience again, Fred SC (talk) 17:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


Any chance you could take a look at the discussion at Talk:Bmibaby? There is a user who refuses to accept that the company name should be capitalised despite my repeated attempts to explain it and providing links to WP:MOSTM and Wikipedia:Name#Use_standard_English_for_titles_even_if_trademarks_encourage_otherwise. Whenever I implement the changes however, I just get reverted. It is rather frustrating that he is refusing to accept the facts! Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 21:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. We really do seem to be going around in circles with this debate. It seems to me that the debate is exhausted now, and that the evidence supports the use of the capitalised version. I can't think of any policy or guideline that would support the use of lowercase. How long should I wait before restoring to capitalisation, and what should I do if reverted? This editor is also doing a similar thing with BMI (airline) and BMI Regional, though I think we can apply the conclusion of this debate to all three articles? Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 22:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, sorry to bother you again about this, but I'm really stuck and unsure as to how to proceed with this situation. No policy or guideline has been provided to support the use of lowercase, yet my attempts to conclude the discussion go ignored. How can we resolve this matter with the least disruption? Nouse4aname (talk) 16:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Choke pear (plant)


This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Choke pear (plant), and it appears to include a substantial copy of For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Duhaney Park Rugby Football Club

  • Why was the Duhaney Park Rugby Football Club deleted? 16:58, 21 March 2009 User:
  • Please what was the exact name of this page? I have deleted no files whose names contain "Duha", at least since 31 August 2008. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

bmibaby or BMIBaby?

You have previously participated in a discussion at Talk:Bmibaby. If you care, please weigh in again at Talk:Bmibaby#Closure again. — AjaxSmack 19:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Would you please help again

Thanks for moving to Talk:Guoyue. Would you please again help to mark the article Guoyue with under-discussion tag, and the content is suggested to be merged with Political musics in China and the article Guoyue is suggested to be redirected to Traditional Chinese music. Please see Talk:Guoyue. Thanks. -Zhinanzhen (talk) 11:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Choke pear (plant)

  • Hey, just wondering about the source for the above article. It popped up on CSB's suspected copyright problems list, and appears to be very similar to this site. While that page is a wiki, the copyright there is ambiguous and almost certainly not compatible with the GFDL, so we can't use their content, see here. Their page looks to have been around since July 2008, I'm just wondering if you can shed any light on this? Best wishes, – Toon(talk) 21:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
  • On Wikipedia this text has been developing gradually since 06:42, 19 October 2003: Choke pear (torture) contains the history of the original single page Choke pear before I split it into 3 subjects. Whereas shows that appeared suddenly fully formed at 23:01, 3 June 2008 and has not been edited since. It is likeliest that the wiki copied from Wikipedia: see Template:Reversecopyvio. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
    • (edit conflict) Ah... after some more digging, I see what has happened - it looks like the text regarding the plant got moved to Choke pear (torture) (evident here during the history merge, which does create the problem of attribution for creation of that content not being at Choke pear (plant), where it should be - that article is attributed to you alone... which seems to violate the GFDL. Is there some way you can fix this by histmerge? If not we should probably leave a note at the article pointing people in the right direction. Best, – Toon(talk) 22:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
  • It is clear to me that almost certainly copied from Wikipedia. I have put a note explaining in Talk:Choke pear (plant)#History note. There is no guilt on Wikipedia here. That edit history contains edits about the plant, and edits about the torture device, mixed together. When I split Choke pear into 3 pages at about 16:10, 21 March 2009, his history had to go with one or other of its daughter pages. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Oops, a missing bracket above seems to have made my (often rambling) explanation particularly unclear, I apologise. You are indeed correct that the other site copied from Wikipedia. The problem now is that the history of Choke pear (plant) does not attribute those who wrote the content; that attribution is instead located at Choke pear (torture) - this creates problems. Does that make sense? Apologies if it looked like I was accusing you of something heinous! :) – Toon(talk) 22:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
  • This problem of interrupted history happens whenever a page is split, and arises often in discussions about whether or not to histmerge pages. As most of the text was about the torture device, I left the history with the daughter page about the torture device. See Talk:Choke pear (plant). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Cayley's Ω process

Grenada Stadiums

Minor Barnstar.png The Minor Barnstar
On the work you've done on merging and redirecting Queen's Park, Grenada to Cricket National Stadium. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 10:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Liverpool James Street

see reply. Simply south (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Lathallan Preparatory School

  • I wondered if you could add the content that was removed to my ssand box to see if it is saveable? I have just up loaded a foto of my own of the school to commons. It is a notable school, and I am sure I would excise any peacock prose, having spent 4 years of my life there ;).-Flaquito (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Saved to User talk:Murray F. White#Lathallan Preparatory School. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 00:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Seems I have my work cut out for me, and understand its deletion. It is now also a secondary school. I have some other work to tend to now, but do thank you for the favor.---Flaquito (talk) 00:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Hampson

Speedy deletion of Dorian Wilson

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Dorian Wilson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mblumber (talk) 03:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Public economics

  • Hello, Anthony Appleyard. Judging from the volume of your WP Edits, one might guess that you are not an individual but an army. Astonishing. I have made minor recent edits for clarity and in an attempt to stay on point at Talk:Public sector economics#Proposed title change to "Public economics". I note that the only places User:Wikidea's name occurs is once each in your edit and in the "Earlier log history of Public Economics'" section. So far as my Edits are concerned, that is as it should be, with the focus on the integrity of the edit history of "Public economics" -- not editors, much less to accuse any editor. I take it that your objection was to one phrase in the top edit of the above link, which now appears as fn. § there (in slightly expanded form for clarity). Let me speak plainly: Wikidea needs no defense. His Public sector economics restored the subject of public economics to a separate article. If using other stubs to write PES is a sin, it is one that Wikidea acknowledges. But it is not a sin. Much less is it a sin if an edit suggests use of old bottles to form new wines. That's WP entrepreneurship -- a good thing! Letting good stuff go to waste would be the real WP sin here. I'd welcome any responses you might have here or at User talk:Thomasmeeks#Public economics. Thank you for your consideration. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 13:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I was merely feeling a bit confused about whether you wanted two files to be history-merged, or merely wanted files to be moved. And see Wikipedia:Content forking. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
  1. the two (earlier PE & PES) cculd be history-merged, so that they could appear as one Revision history
  2. the final title would be PE.
(1)-even-as-"PSE" would be an improvement over the status quo IMO. (2) would improve on that. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 16:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your good jedgment and timely wizardry, noted also at Talk:Public economics#Proposal to archive current contentt of Talk page in 2 weeks. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

dab page style

Hi Anthony Appleyard. I've revised two of your recent edits as they don't follow the Manual of Style. Specifically, as specified in WP:ACCESS, article headings begin at level 2 (== heading ==) and sequentially increase (=== subheading ===)with nesting. Also, WP:MOSDAB suggests using See also for likely misspellings. Thanks for your valuable contributions! —EncMstr (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Caribbean islands move

You have removed the article Inflation from Wikipedia

Editor conflict.

I was about to say: Thank you for putting it back. It was not vandalism after all.

PennySeven (talk) 19:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this is a satisfactory solution, either substantively or in terms of process. Given that the issue is obviously controversial, the correct procedure should be to restore the status quo ante before discussion about a final decision. I also find it worrying that you are intervening as an administrator while also participating as an advocate for a particular position in the discussion. JQ (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Unilateral move was bad form

  • Although I (of course) AGF, a unilateral move to a title not supported by anyone else in the middle of a RM discussion is really bad form. At a minimum, it compromises previous discussion to move since it introduces a status not present at the time those comments were made. I will notify previous discussants of the change but please wait until the full discussion period has elapsed before conducting such action. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 23:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done OK, OK, I have put it back in Inflation Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Inflation RM

You previously participated in a discussion at Talk:Inflation. The article has been moved again so, if you care to clarify of reiterate your position, please participate at Talk:Inflation (financial)#Requested move: part 2. — AjaxSmack 23:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Help with managing books

  • I see that you deleted one of the versions of the biochemistry book I am working on. Could you clarify for me how books should be shared, and the best ways to save them? I was under the impression that books in my own account were somehow different from ones on the bookshelf, but there is still a lot I could learn about how all this is handled. Alice (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • What was the name of this page? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 19:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Here's the link from my watchlist, if this will help:
    I don't want to leave multiple copies of the book at various stages around as files, but I am not sure what the best way is to manage books, and whether there is any point to having the book on the bookshelf as opposed to just as one of my own books. Alice (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC).
  • Was it one of the Underland pages? If so, which one? (See Special:PrefixIndex/Underland) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Do you mean Wikipedia:Books/Biochemistry: an introduction?
    At 03:51, 22 March 2009 User:Alice.haugen created it with this text: "{{saved_book}} [[Category:Wikipedia:Books|Biochemistry: an introduction]]".
    At 17:05, 25 March 2009 User:MU speedy-delete-tagged it "{{speedy|it's an empty book and needless in the project namespace, see also [[User:Alice.haugen/Books/Biochemistry: an introduction]] -- \[[User:MU/r|mu]]/ 17:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)}}".
    At 19:20, 25 March 2009 User:Anthony Appleyard found this page listed in the speedy-deletions list and deleted it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
    Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


Thank you, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 10:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)