User talk:Avicennasis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Avicennasis.

This is Avicennasis's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Avicennasis.
Article policies

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.


Archive File-manager (pale colors).svg
2010 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2011 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2012 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2014 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2015 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2016 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4


Speedy deletion contested: SHREE MRIDANGA SHAILESWARI TEMPLE Muzhakkunnu,Kannur[edit]

Hello Avicennasis. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of SHREE MRIDANGA SHAILESWARI TEMPLE Muzhakkunnu,Kannur, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is about a temple, not a person. Thank you. - MrX 12:06, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I must have misclicked. I think "A7 - Unremarkable company or organization" would still apply here, though. Unless you feel otherwise, I'd be happy to re-tag it as such. Avicennasis @ 12:10, 18 Tamuz 5776 / 12:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I guess a temple would fall in a gray area between a building and a religious organization. I usually consider such articles to be about buildings, but I have no objection to you retagging it under A7 org.- MrX 12:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I've retagged it and deleted the first notice from that users talk page. Avicennasis @ 12:28, 18 Tamuz 5776 / 12:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy Delete of Redirect from Old Username[edit]

Hi,

I saw you've just tagged my old username's page (user:xensyria) and its talk page (user talk:xensyria) for speedy deletion under WP:U2. One of the mitigating factors is:

  • "the previous name of a recently renamed user (which should normally be left as a redirect to the new name for a reasonable time)"

While "recently" and "reasonable time" aren't defined (I think it's been a year or two), there are still a fair number of pages (about 200) that link to my old username, which would become red links, with no simple way for editors to contact me. Keeping it as a redirect, at least while I'm still around, wouldn't cause any problems I can foresee, and could easily be overwritten if another editor took the username. I've temporarily removed the tags pending discussion.

Thanks for putting in the hours on all the admin work you're doing! ‑‑YodinT 18:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. If there are only 200 links or so, it'd be an easy enough job to re-link them to your new username. The old userpage could be moved to your current user subspace if you wanted to keep it, and the talkpage deletion summary (once the aforementioned pages were re-linked) could still point to your new username in the deletion summary. Does that seem like a viable option for you? Avicennasis @ 21:23, 19 Tamuz 5776 / 21:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
That works (is it ok to edit archived talk pages like that?). I've put in a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/AutoWikiBrowser to speed up the 200 edits, unless you'd be able to get it done faster? The other option I'd seen was to register my old username to reserve it, and then keep the user & usertalk pages as redirects. ‑‑YodinT 21:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Editing archives for this purpose should be fine - you aren't changing the content of the discussion at all - you are just making sure that links point to the user who actually left the comment, i.e., you. AWB would be the way I would change this, myself. The other option of registering it should be fine as well, so whichever you prefer. Avicennasis @ 13:59, 21 Tamuz 5776 / 13:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Doppelganger template[edit]

(Copied from User talk:Nyttend) Regarding the CSD decline on User:Simmaco and User:Simmaco Quinto, your edit summary says "That's the whole point of the {{doppelganger}} template)". Unless I'm mistaken, Template:Doppelganger doesn't apply here, as the accounts were never actually made. Of the 2,648 pages in Category:Wikipedia doppelganger accounts added by this template, almost all others are actual accounts. Merely templating a userpage without actually registering the username doesn't achieve anything. Respectfully, I'd like to ask you to reconsider the decline. Avicennasis @ 11:09, 22 Tamuz 5776 / 11:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I just checked the U2 criterion, and I'd say it's between the position you advocate and my rationale for declining. You say that the account doesn't exist, so U2 is good. I said that U2 doesn't apply to doppelgangers, regardless of existence. Turns out that it excludes redirects from misspellings of an established user's userpage, which of course these aren't. However, I'd argue that the exclusive use of the doppelganger template is functionally the same (what's the practical difference?), so deleting these pages would go against the spirit of the criterion.
I'm not willing to delete these under U2. However, if you'd like, I'll create an MFD nomination for them: laying out what happened, copy/pasting your rationale and mine, and asking for others to decide. What do you think? Nyttend (talk) 11:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
(Copied from User talk:Nyttend) Thanks for the reply and explanation. MfD may be the route to go with things as is. That being said, doppelganger accounts are permissible reason to register such a username. I would think it only fair to the actual user in question if we ask if they would like to register those usernames first, before starting an MfD. If you don't have any opposition, I'll drop them a line explaining this and asking if they'd like to register them. Avicennasis @ 15:41, 22 Tamuz 5776 / 15:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)