User talk:Bonkers The Clown/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Monkey God OR

Thanks for correcting me on this. I've better familiarized myself with OR now. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

kidz in the Kitchen

There seem to be no reasons for the rejection of kidz in the kitchen. Can I get some insight. The ice cream will melt before it getst to you from here. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tricia Ziemer (talk • contribs) 20:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I think you are bonkers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.239.72.120 (talk) 03:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm Bonkers. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 03:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Your garlic ice cream hook

Hi, your hook currently in Prep 3 says:

• ... that garlic ice cream is savoury in taste and, according to garlic restaurant The Stinking Rose's recipe, is basically vanilla ice cream with garlic?

As far as I can see, the reference just says: "Mixed in to the six flavors they would make at home and bring to the conventions were savory flavors such as tomato or garlic." Unless I'm missing something, that doesn't support the hook fact. Merely mixing in a little bit of savory flavor does not necessarily make something savory. I've had the garlic ice cream at The Stinking Rose, and I can verify that it does taste like vanilla ice cream with garlic added; the taste is predominantly sweet, not savory. Unless you have some other source (or something else in this one), I think the first part of the hook should be removed; something like:

• ... that garlic ice cream, according to garlic restaurant The Stinking Rose's recipe, is basically vanilla ice cream with garlic?

MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 05:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

In addition, I checked The Stinking Rose recipe linked to in the article, which describes it as "thick creamy vanilla ice cream with a hint of the roasty garlic sweetness. If you didn't know that the ice cream contained garlic, you might not even guess it was in there." That sure doesn't sound savory to me. I'm changing the hook, which is due to hit the Main Page in about seven hours. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Garlic ice cream

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Jodi Arias: Dirty Little Secret

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Jodi Arias: Dirty Little Secret.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for revisiting. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Why you're welcome. =) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 05:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Age Against the Machine

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Jimmy Wales has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Replacing a photograph with a controversial painting and claiming it is a more recent photo for better identification is a textbook example of a misleading edit summary. I can't imagine a legitimate reason for the specific image switch you made, but if you've got one, please put it in the edit summary, rather than writing something which is simply false. Paintings are not photographs, period. ~TPW 13:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not interested in arguing semantics. I reverted the edit and replied to your comment. Feel free to try to convince other editors of the page that the image and accompanying edit summary were appropriate.--~TPW 14:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Garlic production in China

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Mussafah

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Milo Dinosaur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Star (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Corn production in the United States

Orlady (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

ITN for the haze

Hi Bonkers, isn't there any credit for ITN? Any idea why nothing has been given out yet? I think you know best... Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 16:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, this time I'm not sure. You could ask the people at ITN. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Bonkers The Clown

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:47, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but I think I would rather the mark-up editor ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

ITN for 2013 Southeast Asian haze

Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 08:55, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Milo Dinosaur

Gatoclass (talk) 18:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Zeng Guo Yuan

Gatoclass (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hayden Ng

Hi Bonkers! TQ for your comments. I have edited that para you highlighted. Pls have a look! Mr S Green 03:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnsnake (talk • contribs)

Thank you very much Bonkers! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnsnake (talk • contribs) 04:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber (submissions) and Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 09:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/High-Probabilty Request Sequence

Dear Bonkers The Clown:

You declined the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/High-Probabilty Request Sequence because it didn't have reliable sources. I rescued this article from the six-month old abandoned article category and improved it by removing a lot of the "psychobabble". Can you explain what is wrong with the sources, which have been written by a variety of qualified experts and accepted by recognized publishers and/or peer-reviewed journals? I can try to find some more, but these articles cover every aspect of what is in the text.

You also asked that the references be cited in-line. In fact, they are. Because I took over the article from another author, I kept the citation style that he or she had used, which is American Psychological Association's parenthetical style. This is according to Wikipedia policy. Here's an example :Wikipedia:Inline citation/examples, which reinforces that the first author's style should be maintained, and shows the parenthetical style. This style doesn't involve little blue numbers, but I believe that it is acceptable. You will see the (Author, date) citations in every paragraph, along with the full references further down the page. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Anne Delong: I pressed the wrong button, and I thought that it would be more conventional to have an inline citation style, rather than parenthetical. There is a reason why the vast majority of GAs and FAs use inline citations; that is, for better verifiability. But never mind, that aside, the article still could use some brushing up, it reads too much like an essay certainly deserving entry in the WikiPsychology Journal, but I do not think on WikiPedia it will do. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:50, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Bonkers The Clown: I think you have missed my point that the paranthetical style is a form of inline citation, and is just as verifiable as the other (see the reviewing instructions). About the essay-ness: I am pretty sure that this is a well-accepted technique that is being reported, not a new idea that is being proposed. It would not be accepted by a psychology journal because there is nothing new in it that's not already in the cited sources. I have to admit, though, that my psychology and education degrees are both well out of date, so I will ask for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology and see if the experts there can suggest some improvements. Thanks for you time; obviously my attempts to make the article straightforward are incomplete if it struck you as an essay. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Anne Delong: I know it is a style, but just not as conventional, per WikiNorm. Sentences like "(Think of the game "Simon says".)" certainly don't sound encyclopedic. Just a lil' rewrite, just a lil'. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John Harrison (ice cream taster)

Gatoclass (talk) 17:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Academic Health Science Networks

Dear Bonkers The Clown

You declined the article Academic Health Science Networks because it sounded like an advertisement.

My challenge is that this is a new, government-funded group of organisations. The stated purpose sounds positive (it is a government initiative) and it is too soon to rely on performance evidence. I have changed it to make it absolutely clear that this is just what the government say...

Also, there are 15 newly-formed AHSNs. On advice from another editor I've removed the list which was linked to their individual websites. It's still in there as a hidden comment so I can bring it back once they each have wikipedia pages.

Is there any chance you could glance at it to see if it sounds less up-beat now?  Many thanks

Inscribe Inscribe (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

HAMS article

Hello Bonkers

I would very much appreciate it if you could help me by pointing out which sections of the HAMS article sound like an advertizement and how i could rewrite them so that they sound like a proper encyclopedia article and not like and advertizement.

I was confused by your comment that I must cite independent, reliable, published sources, which are not materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. Eight of the nine references which are cited are independent, reliable, published sources, which are not materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed.

I would greatly appreciate any help you can give me.

Pork chop tze (talk) 01:46, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Changi Budget Terminal

Hello, so I see you're a Singaporean Wikipedian. I was wondering: have you been to Changi within the last few months? How does the site of the now-demolished budget terminal look now? I used the Budget Terminal when I went to SG two years ago and since I haven't been back, I am unaware of how the area looks now. I can't even find recent pictures of the Budget Terminal site. Has there been new updates on the demolition and the site? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I went to Changi last month. It's sorta like an empty plot of land, and if I'm not wrong, there's some construction sigh nearby. Wasn't really looking out for the Budget Terminal, but now that you mention it, I recall. It's paving way for a Terminal Four. Why not visit us again, then? :) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (talk page stalker) I'm not sure how the progress is, but I know they are gonna use the site to build a new T4. Whether it is gonna be bigger or nicer or a shopping mall like T3, I'm not sure though. Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 11:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Anime Festival Asia

Thanks for answering my previous question. I have one more. Since you're Singapore based, are you familiar with a convention in SG called Anime Festival Asia? Is it promoted a lot on television and in the news? And is it relatively well known in the country? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Ugh sorry, I'm never a fan of Anime. But I do know a few geeky friends who have attended a very similar-sounding fest. I'm guessing it's some major Anime convention with the cosplay and all. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello With reference to your rejection of my submission: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Geevarghese_Mar_Philoxenos

The person is very interesting and of high significance to the Malankara Indian Orthodox Church. I found it funny that exceptions for notability include Porn Stars and criminals and not pious individuals. Now given, the time of his life on earth, the print media was almost non existent and even what written records of his life are available are not available on the internet. I had reference 2 books which were written about him. I have also included some newspaper excerpts/clippings from a recent event where the church bestowed an honor on the late bishop, though there are no reference to those newspapers. whoever posted those, did a bad job. I have dug up as much as 1 possibly can on the net about the bishop.

In the light of the above, it would be great if you could give the article a second look, perhaps if time permits, share a few pointers on what I can do to improve it more specifically.

Thanks and appreciate your efforts to keep wikipedia honest!

Not so much about notability per se, but I'm really uncomfortable with the way it's written. I'm seeing many peacock terms in the article. We don't do promotional articles. Maybe you could fix that, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Amusement Park Quarter 3, 2013 Newsletter

	WikiProject Amusement Parks Newsletter Quarter 3, 2013	463	124	5.13	50	30%	» Full edition
		Unassessed Articles	Coordinates Needed	WikiWork Load	Project Members	B&M articles are GA or FA

22:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Heladería Coromoto

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zeng Guo Yuan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page City Harvest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 13:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 13:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Doleschallia bisaltide (Autumn Leaf) renom1.
Message added 14:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 14:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Studio West Article

You recently rejected an article of mine about Studio West in San Diego. Was looking to get some info on why and what I can do to make it acceptable. Getting rid of articles referenced by the home site of the studio? etc. Thanks 20:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 05:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Enjoy a laugh. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 05:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Hinduism in Los Angeles

The DYK project (nominate) 00:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Plastingia naga.
Message added 08:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 08:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Oyster ice cream

Hello! Your submission of Oyster ice cream at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bonkers The Clown. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/July 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive/Arctic Kangaroo.
Message added 03:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 03:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Saint Francis Veterinary CEnter

Hi Bonkers! We're trying really hard - we're getting a little bit of conflicting info, but we'll get it right! The prior editor sent a note that 'a little more work will do' and we used the wikipedia-recommended live chat to work with other editors to work on this. So we really are working hard to get you what you're looking for, please know that! Since you last reviewed it, we removed two sections entirely, we added a number of news articles, we got rid of the references to quantifiable documentation regarding 'accreditation' that the live chat people thought was fine and dandy but not NOTABLE - so we took those out. And we scrubbed words out like 'advanced' and 'state of the art' and references that could be construed as advertising. So we're getting there!

Hi, Bonkers. You may be familiar with me from the Teahouse. I have to ask, per what rationale and on what basis did you promote the article discussed in this thread? I see nothing that resembles notability. Just so you know, as soon as I get an answer from you, I am going to take the article to AfD. It's a promo piece on a local business, period. Without some good reason why, local businesses are not notable. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the sources are reliable enough. It no longer reads as too promotional. If you feel like AfDing it, by all means. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Under which notability rule? They sure aren't for WP:CORP, which states, "An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it" and also states "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary." All of the press I found on the organization is from Metro Philly. That's local. Additionally, it was all on the single event of the grand opening of the doggie rehab and mostly about the fact that the celebrity was associated with it. That is not coverage in detail. And I am sorry, but the majority of the article is also about that, discussing and name dropping about the event. That is promotional.

You might think I am making a mountain out of a molehill here, but hear me out. The author of that article was at AfC to create an article. They expect it to get reviewed. It might be a bit unsettling to get denied, but it is at least somewhat expected. Well, now the article is in mainspace and they are all happy. "But wait, what's this...it is nominated for deletion? How did that happen. I figured when it passed at afc it was good to go." And it should be. When this article gets deleted (and it will. look around. Do you find many articles on local vet clinics? That is because, like most local businesses, they are just not notable.), I can pretty much promise you that Mrpresident80 will be gone as a Wikipedia editor.

I edit Wikipedia for fun. I am guessing you do too. It ceases to be fun for me when I have to be a bad guy and piss off an innocent person like Mrpresident80 because the things that I like to do here are short-circuted by someone who fails to see the impact their actions may have on others. If you don't know what notability standards apply to what articles, perhaps you should take a break from AfC and find out. Work on AfD's for a while. You learn pretty quickly what it takes to be notable. I gotta tell you, this is very disappointing to me. We see enough notability questions at Teahouse that you should have a fair idea of what it is. And if you are working at AfC, you should know the notability standards well enough to apply them correctly. Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Who edits Wikipedia seriously? Definitely not me. Do you think WP:LOCAL would be relevant here? Well I've created a few hundred mainspace articles; I more or less know what is notable and what's not. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You just cited me an informational essay. It cites WP:CORP in it. WP:CORP is part of the notability policy. Like I said.....Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, alright then. Delete it! (Actually I did not like it but I just felt sorry for the guy) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

[1] I had placed the article as "under review". ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 04:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

So it was you! But why? It's very clear cut that under AfC standards, it's a quick fail. Sorry though :P ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't too obvious. And I don't usually use that tag unless under emergency situations like this. Heard of kiasuism? ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 04:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Like those aunties who use tissue paper to reserve a seat? LOL ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Tissue paper? Never seen before. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 04:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Broaden your horizon ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Requesting elaboration

Hi, Can you elaborate the rejection of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jainism and Hinduism? WP:NOTESSAY, which was provided, mainly talks about original research, however, as far as I understand, the article is certainly not an original research. I have only presented the information in the source. Any help in improving the article to be included in wikipedia would be highly appreciated. Thanks, Rahul Jain (talk) 07:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

XenonHD

Can you please explain to me how it sounds like an advertisement? i understand that it is my opinion, but an advertisement and informing are very similar. while informing informs, and advertisement is looking for compensation. i am not getting paid and neither is anyone related to xenonhd. this post is also very neutral and in no way biased. please let me know how to make it fall into the criteria. Thank you ~Cookie1203~

Viatcheslav Mirilashvili

Hi Bonkers Thanks for reviewing my article. Everything in the article is factual and written to provide another piece to the story of VK - specifically one of its main founders and largest shareholder. Mirilashvili was an integral part of the company because of his investment...Why was it declined?

Thanks, 72facts

about notability

Dear Bonkers, thanks about your pay attention. but please guide me carefully about proving notability, as I've been confused about notability. thanks alot

Enterprise architecture framework - history correction

Are you the person who just now removed my rewrite of the enterprise architecture framework history section?

That rewrite is the result of several years discussion with people in the know. It corrected several errors and misleading statements in the previous version. It included references to several other Wikipedia pages, which back up the corrections made. And a reference to EA that predates the previous one by 5 years.

How do I reinstate the better version of the history? How do I change it so that it does not get deleted again?

Graham Berrisford

DYK for Richard Eu

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Han

Answered you [2] Awien (talk) 13:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

My submission at Articles for creation: Muhlenberg Greene Architects

As I am in the process of further researching the history of Muhlenberg Greene Architects, we are simultaneously updating our history on our company website, at http://mgarchitects-ltd.com/history. This information has been researched and cited to other outside sources within the Wikipedia article, but some information on the Wikipedia page will mirror the information found on the MGA history page. Is this okay? Do I need to cite the Wikipedia page on our company website? I'm not sure how to avoid this duplication of information, as I am simultaneously researching for both the website and Wikipedia article.

Also, I am researching the company history through news articles and company archives, and have not intended to present a biased view. I am not sure what information in the article reads like an advertisement, as it is all researched through historic newspaper archives and old building blueprints, company archives, and historic photographs. Thank you for your help! LvanS (talk) 15:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Berendo Street and Avenue

I noticed you declined (or as I prefer it: denied) my article. I just want you to help me improve my article so it can get accepted in Wikipedia. But first of all, I want to say that I think my article is notable. If you haven't looked at the reference of Berendo Middle School, please do. That's where I went to create the "History" section. If you read carefully, you'll see that one of the paragraphs talks about the naming of Berendo. If you have looked at that reference, then I assume that you thought it wasn't reliable. Next, I noticed you wrote: "Entried should be written from a neutral point of view. I believe I did. I wrote only about Berendo, not about something else. If you declined it for that reason, then I don't know. Then it says, "...and should refer to a ramge of independent, reliable, published sources." If you declined it for that reason, then I probably need to provide more sources and/or provide independent reliable published sources. Anyway that's all. I just need you to tell me where I went wrong and I'll see what I do about it.

Thanks, 75.62.133.100 (talk) 22:31, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Ahem. I'm sorry, but If there's no response, then it means you won't help me or what? Wikipedia humph! 75.62.133.197 (talk) 18:19, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Sir, please help me! i Apologize about the "Wikipedia humph!" thing. It's just that I really want this article to be accepted so that's why I'm writing. Also, I've noticed that you haven't responded to the others who need your help yet. So I need you to respond to them as well. So let's take care of this now. 75.62.131.69 (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Other than that I need you to help me find references that discuss the roads in depth. Thanks, 75.62.131.69 (talk) 04:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

This is for not responding to my question so far.

Don't make me assign a countdown phase. 75.62.134.122 (talk) 18:46, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Last week, someone tried to archive this discussion and leave the following comment; deleting the text from here caused the Edit Filter to go nuts, so you weren't given the message. This discussion has been moved into the archives file. You haven't responded to this message. Please respond. To find it, go to 75.62.135.134's talk page (link here: User talk:75.62.135.134). Click on "Archives of old discussions can be found here." It's right there! Please respond to this message. Complete diff is here, if you care. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ralf Köttker

You must use reliable sources, such as published books and mainstream press publications - I did exactly whats written in the Help:Referencing for beginners. Die Welt and Metropolregion Rhein-Neckar News are mainstream press publications in germany. Additionaly I added his biography from the German Football Association - a highly recommended and also the biggest football association of all country associations. What else do you need? Cr0kesselhaus (talk) 08:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roma Education Fund

Hi there- I'm not seeing gross NPOV violations on this article? Could you perhaps expand upon your concerns for the article's author? J Milburn (talk) 09:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Not just I sniff an advertisement rat. Look at the language. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Don't steal my reviews

You have just declined a few submissions after I had marked them as under review - please respect the tag that says someone else is already busy reviewing. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I apologise, but those were all obvious fails. I think you were wanting to "reserve" the review, when in fact they need no scrutinizing. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for elaboration

Hi Bonkers,

You recently declined the submission I wrote about British Businessman Michael Roderick Oliver on the grounds that the references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability.

Thank you for the feedback. I just wanted to check you had been able to access the articles from two separate national UK newspapers that support the statements made in the article, and that you do indeed feel that this level of press coverage - as well as the regional coverage also cited - is insufficient as evidence of Mr Oliver's notability.

Before submitting, I had looked at the live article for Steve Morgan of Redrow Homes - a businessman of a similar level http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Morgan_%28businessman%29. This page appeared to contain references of a similar standard to those in the piece I submitted. If not, please could you explain what distinguishes the two.

If you could confirm that it is his lack of notability and not some technical issue with the references that is behind the rejection of the article I would be most grateful, as this will affect my decision as to whether to persevere with the submission.

Thanks in advance,

John Bowes 1983 (talk) 13:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bonkers,

I'm still waiting for a response on the above.

My question again - was my article rejected becuase its subject is not notable enough or becuase his notability was not supported by the references I provided?

I'd appreciate your attention and guidance.

Many thanks,

John Bowes 1983 (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Casa del Arte (Concepción, Chile)

Can you readdress the situation, thanks.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I am trying to make the article more reach with all reliable contents and reference links. Please suggest me more.

(Arifhasan23 10:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)Arifhasan23) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arifhasan23 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Smoka Bowl

Bro, just FYI, I placed as "Under review" before you clicked the "Decline" button. But never mind already, I don't know how to review that. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 10:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I think you clicked after actually. At least according to the rev history. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

AfC Alfreda Frances Bikowsky

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Alfreda_Frances_Bikowsky

"Generally looks good, but the tone is slightly off and the sections read weird"

What? Those are very minor points and completely unhelpful for improving the article up your standards. Please be more specific and more substantive. Mnnlaxer (talk) 13:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Start Snuggle

IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle users

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-office ^connect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail^{(talk • work)}, Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ali_Siddiq_Comedian

Hello Bonkers The Clown,

You declined my submission saying that "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability." I cited to Showtime's website, a radio station website, and the reputable comedy site: Comedy Scene in Houston. Please recommend how to improve the submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBrodenFirm (talk • contribs) 18:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Keith_N._Schoville

You recently declined a proposed article with this boilerplate comment.

"This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies."

I edited the document slightly after this comment, but I don't want to waste your time resubmitting it if there are deeper flaws in it. My problem is that I don't understand clearly what sections you thought seemed like an advertisement. I asked an editor on the LiveChat session to look at it and they didn't see an issue with it. They suggested that I ask you directly.

This is my first submission to Wikipedia and I have sincerely attempted to be neutral in tone. The subject in question is an academic and I have tried to be very straightforward about listing their academic works and establishing their notability.

Pusat Tingkatan Enam Meragang

You have rejected our page for creation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Pusat_Tingkatan_Enam_Meragang The reason you give is - "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability" However, the guidelines state that schools are exempt from such a requirement. I agree the article is rather short at the moment but I hope it will be a collective effort from our community and therefore this is just the start. Verifcation has been given with the reference of the school's official website.

Please advise how we can move forward with this. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cikgubrian (talk • contribs) 17:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Arubianus

I am surprised by the stated reason for the rejection. The sources cites are identical to its German language version. If not enough than German page is also not good and needs better reference. I will look for more English source later to improve page and resubmit.

Was my English as submitted ok? 24.247.99.74 (talk) 04:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Murder of Elsie Lie

Hello! Your submission of Murder of Elsie Lie at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rlendog (talk) 01:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

AFC

Hi, Bonkers. I'm just a little bit concerned you have a whole bunch of unanswered questions from people trying to submit articles through the AfC process. Do you plan to address these? We're all grateful for your help in AfC reviews, but I'm concerned your seemingly nonchalant attitude isn't necessarily what we need, as I've seen the odd complaint come in (example one example two). Could I politely request that when somebody questions your rationale for accepting or declining a submission, that you answer it in a prompt and diligent manner, and keep an eye on the help desk for questions coming in about submissions? AfC has come under a lot of strong criticism over the past couple of days, and I'm keen to see the general quality of reviewing improve to try and address that. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes I honestly have no idea who they are and which article they are referring to. A little tiring to explain things that I think are covered in Wikipedia:My first article. I promptly and diligently ask questions that have been asked in a similar fashion. Thanks I will be improving ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't you be finding out who they are and which article they are referring to, then? I often find clicking on their contribs is a quick way of doing so - have you tried that?

What does "I promptly and diligently ask questions that have been asked in a similar fashion" mean, please? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sonic characterization of marine species

Hi, I tagged this a few minutes ago as CSD#G12, as it is a copyvio of http://www.marinemammals.in/ and subpages of that site. The article was actually created yesterday as Sonic Classification of Marine Species of the Indian seas and deleted for the very same reason. I'm not sure why, but AFCBot removed the CSD tag just before you declined (yet again) this submission. However, copyvio is copyvio and cannot be allowed even in AFC space, so I guess this still should be speedied. You seem to be more familiar with AFC (I am not), so perhaps you jknow how to handle this. Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 11:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. I've tagged it as deemed fit. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

AfC (don't shoot the messenger)

Hi, Bonkers, theonesean here. Just wanted to thank you for all your awesome work at AfC. That being said, PArnold, a new reviewer, made the following comment on a dicsussion thread in which I gave him advice on how to improve his article. Take a read.

~ I just had one of the Wikipedia editors "Bonkers the Clown" just tell me my article is not Nobel enough and did not have enough reliable,verifiable secondary sources? Your thoughts? I almost get from "Bonkers the Clown talk page they are just out right rude to authors and other Wikipedia editors. — Preceding unsignedcomment added by PArnold (talk • contribs) 16:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Now, I don't know the full circumstances of this, and that's why I'm here. Do you have any recollection of this event? Could you fill me in as to the details? Thanks, theonesean 20:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Not sure about the nobility of his article, but you see, they tend to get upset when their articles are declined. I don't remember offending him, he's probably just sore about his article getting booed by me. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

How to submit an article to revision after modification?

I submitted my article "Automatic Systems" for the first time 10 days ago, unfortunately it was rejected so I modified the article and submitted it again. It was rejected again so I modified it one more time but now I cannot submit it to revision anymore and I don't know why...I already asked a question about my article problem on a talk page but no-one responded me...Please I really want to publish this article and I nedd help, thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmarraas (talk • contribs) 07:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

You Didn't Even Read it did you?... Pfftt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth, reality and justice (talk • contribs) 09:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I read it and to be blunt I think it's crappy. Why capitalise the "He" and stuff. Do you have anything to do with him? See WP:COI. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I Have nothing to do with either subject but Algorythm BBC profile connects to the BBC profile of the subject I'm working on.

The article can be expaded, however Notablity is established by having singles on a MAJOR LABEL. Plus Mainstream Media Broadcast and substancial Playlist eveidence, which is all missing from the Algorythm article.

Thanks for your time Regards

Truth, reality and justice (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure Brush Up on the Article if You Would then. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

The editor is obviously missing your sarcasm, and doesn't understand that you find the excessive and erroneous use of capitals falls short. Why not be helpful, and actually say so?--~TPW 12:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

In defense, I did say so a bit above. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

What Would Be The Point When You Claim subject is not notable when clearly the subject Meets The golden Rule requirments. If you think the article does not have a enough susstance you should decline for that reason and not for Notablity Issues, which is being done by many reviewrs to put authors off and control what they (The Reviewer) would personally like to apear on Wikki as accepted.

Consistency is Highly important, these double standards lead speradic Wikkipedia with pathetic article being accepted like Algorithm's which has not established Notablity but has been accepted.

Regards

Truth, reality and justice (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm really sensing NPOV as well as poor education in the EL language in that tone of yours. Stop comparing your article with xyz's article. Based on this article's merits alone, I can confidently say every qualified reviewer would fail it. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Tone?... That would be the tone in your Head... Problem now clealry established.

Algorithm is not notable, where can I report? Reviewer should be banned, this is an abuse of Wikkipedia.

No time for worrying about typos and spelling when the recipent is childishly wasting my time... Make my point as fast as I can, You mention My English Language with attempt as Belittlement of me personally, this is a clever distraction. You are clearly emotionally involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth, reality and justice (talk) 13:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Truth, reality and justice (talk • contribs) 13:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

When I say "Tone", I'm not referring to the crappy song playing on my iPod now, I'm talking about you using crappy words like "Submission Is Superior [...]". If you didn't say otherwise, I would have really thought you were affiliated with our friend Ronnie Pollock. And do you have something against Algorithm? There is a platform on this website called "Wikipedia: Articles for Deletion", where you can bring up articles for consideration to be deleted. Scurry there if you must. I reference WP:OTHERCRAP (aptly titled) and ask you to stop comparing this with that. Each article is judged by its own merits. If you are unhappy with the way AfC works, publish it yourself, problem solved. Then you let me know and I will tag it for deletion. Easier. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

As a side note, en.wikipedia may not be that good a place for you to stay if you can't even master the Essentials Of the ENglish LAnguage, i.e. appropriately USing CAP LOCKS and your grammar. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to publish articles I write myself, although it is clear that people like the author of the Algorithm article maybe getting away with such behaviour. I'm not comparing my article with others but rather attempting to highlight that there is an inconsitency in the reviewing process with regards to notablity. What is good for some ;) is clealry not good for the all and low quality Citations are being accepted on some articles and without establishing true notablity.

I'm not connected to Pollock Personally, there is no evidence to suggest such a thing. I'm clearly passionate about my stance regarding inconcistent requirments for Golden rule.

You say Wikki may not be for me, when it is supposed to be for everyone, for the benefit of everyone on the planet and is not supposed to be a social networking site / hangout where you can pretend to be cool and rack up some apprent status.

Thanks for letting me know where I can report the article I'm finding upsetting.

Truth, reality and justice (talk) 14:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for not signing your post. Now, go enjoy your early fishy dinner. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 09:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Too early for dinner haha. Man, it's not my habit to not sign. :/ ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/NOW News

Hi Bonkers, I have a couple of questions regarding the submission you declined for NOW News. I understand that any submission to Wikipedia mustn't read like an advertisement but I fail to see how this does. We offer a very skeletal and abbreviated description of what the site is and its content within. Can you please shed some more light on where exactly you feel we are being slightly self-promoting?

NOW News is a news portal that was previously on Wikipedia as NOW Lebanon which has since expanded to include news beyond Lebanon and this new page will serve to let readers know that we offer both local Lebanese as well as regional news. We didn't want to update the previous page because the brand has been completely redesigned and operates under a new name.

Please let me know what specific changes need to be made, to which sections precisely to get this page online.--Rachedhaddad 11:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Rachedhaaddaadd. The "Sections" section should vamoose and you can kindly remove those social media links. Resubmit and let's talk the talk. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, the Sections part and the social media link are removed as requested. Can you please check it. Thanks,--Rachedhaddad 08:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

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

Your edit summaries on National Police Cadet Corps

Plip!

Please don’t use such words in edit summaries. It made it seem as if you were on a random blanking spree. I see a dozen entries like this in RC. Do you think i would think yours is a valid edit if it looks like vandalism? � (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Well now could you register my name in your brain's banks and the next time you see this name blanking stuff like this, you know it's not vandalism. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Because the universe revolves around one editor's sense of humor, which based on innumerable comments is largely out of sync? I'm sure that's going to happen.--~TPW 12:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed you added a speedy delete tag after an edit war. Apparently it is not done in good faith. Kindly behave like a civilised adult and do not abuse the good intentions of the system in wikipedia. And as for your claims that the entries are copied from the blog, did it ever come across your mind that the copying could have gone in the opposite direction? And just how "unique" do you expect a pledge or a list of units to be?--Huaiwei (talk) 14:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: Joyou

Hi Bonkers, thanks for reviewing my submission Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Joyou. Following your advice, I have referenced additional sources since then. Unfortunately, my submission was declined again though. The recent reviewer was blocked for being a sockpuppet afterwards so I am unsure what to do. Would you have a look and give me some brief advice what I should probably change to meet your criteria for approval? Thanks a lot! Cheers, Pfandtasse (talk) 12:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Stop

I came here to give you some advice on how to interact better with Arctic Kangaroo (talk · contribs), on the basis that you called out a number of his bad AFC submissions and seemed like the more mature of the pair. Now I find you're belittling new editors and being generally uncivil. Stop it, now. People use AfC because they are new and need help. Wikilinking WP:OTHERCRAP, having a go at their spelling, and saying "Well now could you register my name in your brain's banks" is not acceptable. If you carry on, I predict either you, Arctic, or both will end up at WP:ANI, and I fear you will find it very difficult to untangle yourself from that situation. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

What? I respect AK a lot. He is a talented editor and i did not intentionally single out his bad submissions. I just went by order of the submissions, systematically reviewing. It's just a coincidence... .__. Well, only time will tell. We'll see... Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 15:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Bonkers never insulted or look down on me before. Stop making up stories please, look at the situation first. We have chatted a lot with each other, so there a plenty of stuff for you to judge the two of us. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 15:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

No, you've misunderstood what I was getting it at. Bonkers, please don't insult editors (I don't mean AK in this instance), edit war and add spurious CSD tags to articles. And both of you, please read WP:COMPETENCE - I'm particularly annoyed at AK declining Sarah Franscesca Green, who I believe is inherently notable per WP:PROF and both myself and Huon had been working with the article's creator on the Help Desk. I have already dealt with two submissions Bonkers has declined on the help desk and I see a third query has just come in a few minutes ago. I'm not surprised the two of you hate me, I'm a father of two and my kids don't like it when I tell them off, but I'm honestly not having a go at you as people, I'm just saying your work at AfC has caused problems, and as Mdann52 has already said, I urge the pair of you to just go and take a break from it all before things get any worse. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

And you have misunderstood me yet again. Go read the decline reason as well as my comment again. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 15:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Ritchie, you are actually a valuable contributor, but well, my impression of you has changed. I have to see something if my impression of you were to change. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 15:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Look, Please just drop the stick AK and Bonkers. My recommendation is that you stop participating in the drive for the time being. Mdann52 (talk) 16:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure, let's drop it. Ritchie I personally don't mind you "telling me off" because I get that a lot (only on this glorious encyclopedia). Only a few of my AfC submissions have been "bad". I see this as perfectly normal. Ok and for the so-called edit wars and "spurious" CSD tags, I feel it is not related to the AfC drive we are discussing, but if you need to know the truth, the war was just me removing some crappy lines and an editor who was too quick to press "Revert". I wanted to blow the page up and start from scratch, so I'd rather the thing be deleted. Back to AfC, I am a bit sorry the newbies failed to get my humour. I shall start giving them straight laced responses from now onwards. Fair enough? I'm fine with taking a rest for a while, but currently it appears that the other fish are not busy eating the growing pile of worms... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

General notes about AfC (I'm not the messenger this time)

Bonkers, I know (by reading this page) that you're a jocular and funny guy. However, if you could be more direct and less jokey with the newbies who contact you about their articles, that would be awesome. Your (and all of our) purpose(s) at AfC is to help newbies write articles, and your joke-filled, indirect "nonsensical babble" isn't helping. If you want an example of how to deal with newbies well, check out Dodger67 (talk · contribs). He calmly and clearly explains what was wrong with the article and gave concrete steps to improve it. What you should do is, when a newbie, any newbie, contacts you about an article that was reviewed, you read their question or comment, and you respond. Calmly, civilly, and clearly. Give them links to essays and policy that pertains to their article and/or question. Give them advice on how to write better. Critique their article (nicely), and don't obfuscate the truth or make sarcastic remarks, because a lot of newbies are not familiar with Wikiculture and take things literally. Thank you. theonesean 17:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

So I'm expected to be serious, and at the same time make this place as friendly as gallivanting around the rainbow singing Kumbayah. I thought my sarcasm and everything of the like was very obvious. Guess there really are humourless people. Alright, I'll give them politically correct and straight laced answers in the future. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I really don't think you're grasping the concept here. The new editors who submit articles at AfC are people, regular people like you or me. However, they're new to Wikipedia (which can be quite a daunting place at times), they're apprehensive, and in some cases they're scared. Anne Delong (talk · contribs) does a wonderful job writing comprehensive answers and helping newbies with their articles. Be direct, helpful, and complete in your answers. I noticed at the top at your page that you don't respond to anons. WP:IPs are human too. A large portion of AfC articles are created by IPs. Therefore, to do your job, you must respond to anons. It's probably good policy to respond to everybody who posts on your TP, barring vandalism or trolling. theonesean 01:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Chicken and duck blood soup

Hello! Your submission of Chicken and duck blood soup at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Bonkers. I hope you are doing fine. You have rejected my article titled " Wafiq Jizzini" saying that this person is not notable. I have reviwed the Military Notability Guide and this is what I got:

In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources.

In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they:

1. Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour;[1] or
2. Were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times; or
3. Held a rank considered to be a flag, general or air officer, or their historical equivalents; or
4. Held the top-level military command position of their nation's armed forces (such as Chief of the General Staff), or of a department thereof (such as Chief of Army Staff); or
5. Played an important role in a significant military event; or
6. Commanded a substantial body of troops in combat; or
7. Made a material contribution to military science that is indisputably attributed to them; or
8. Were the undisputed inventor of a form of military technology which significantly changed the nature of or conduct of war; or
9. Were recognized by their peers as an authoritative source on military matters/writing.

Wafiq Jizzini complies with points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9. In addition, my references are the Official Lebanese Army website and the Official Lebanese General Security Forces Website and two reputable newspapers. Moreover, Wafiq Jizzini has his name and signature on every Lebanese Passport Issued during the period when he was the Chief of General Security in Lebanon.

Please advise what your opinion is. Thanks, 5.245.105.94 (talk) 08:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)MJ

(stalking) Hi. I can confirm the article's subject is inherently notable per our guidelines for military personnel - the mention in the Lebanese government source confirming his post is sufficient. I have passed your submission, but would recommend joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Military History as they will be able to assist you further. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Cadet Corps (Singapore), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cadet corps (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Declining AfC articles as "ads"

Hi Bonkers, I noticed that you failed 1 of my AfC accepts with the reason that it read like an advert. I just wanna tell you that some of them that read like ads just have to be accepted, as it can't be helped. For one example, see Mike Feerick. Please reconsider the fail. Thanks. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 14:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Mm, sorry but whatcha mean by "can't be helped"? I think it's a legit reason to fail... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

If you look at Mike Feerick, it's impossible to find a way to write it such that it does not sound like an ad. So that's something that you need to consider when reviewing "ads". BTW, Mike Feerick is passed by the guy who made us fed up. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 14:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I rather not rekindle the argument... Why not? It's actually possible and I could do it if I wanted to. Example: A section header "Social and Community Initiatives" is utterly redundant. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Crime in Sri Lanka

Hi there. I've done some more work on Crime in Sri Lanka based on the nom page comments. I removed the "War crimes" section and added a bullet for Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War in the "See also" section, which has improved the 'balance' issue mentioned by an article reviewer. But the article still lacks a historical perspective and statistics, which, I think are necessary. I think the hook is unacceptable and have stated such on the nom page but I don't find anything hooky with the remaining content; perhaps you have an idea? As is, the reviewer finds the topic coverage to be patchy; I agree. I'd recommend either dealing with the recommendations or withdrawing the nomination because, as is, it's not promotable. Perhaps you'd like to comment at Template:Did you know nominations/Crime in Sri Lanka?--Rosiestep (talk) 15:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Page for Creation Review: Acharya Shri Chandanaji

I created the page Acharya Shri Chandanaji that you reviewed. I am working on the 'peacock terms' and the desired formal tone but I also wanted to know if more than 10 sources are absolutely imperative for the article to go public since I have seen some articles that possess not even that. I have added a couple of more links to make sure it's reliable content but do let me know if more sources shall be needed. Thanks! And an early reply would be highly appreciated :) Anupriya19 (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Anupriya19

DYK for Murder of Darren Ng

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Aaah! So this alt was promoted. I guess the preping admin didn't notice new alt provided. Never mind now. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Murder of Liu Hong Mei

Hello! Your submission of Murder of Liu Hong Mei at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! David Eppstein (talk) 05:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Submission of reviewed article

Hello,

I wrote 2 messages on Wikipedia's forum the past 2 weeks about my article submission but I got no answer. Actually I submitted my article Automatic Systems twice to revision but it has been rejected, so I modified it again and now I just cannot submit it anymore and I don't know why, the only thing I can do is "Save the Page", please can anyone help me? Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmarraas (talk • contribs) 06:09, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Benjamin Anderson (adventurer)

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 26 July 2013 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:50, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Mount Elbert

Hi, I think you wrote the geological history paragraph for this article. Would you mind citing it, with a bit of work I think we could get this up to GA.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 18:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no prob. Give me some time though, I'm rather busy with stuff in real life. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:44, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

As an FYI I have nominated it for GA. If it isn't cited (and I'm looking for sources) I think your paragraph will have to go :/ --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Im actually trying to find too.... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 22:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Icephobicity

Hello, Bonkers The Clown.

Could you please provide a bit more specific commnets on why the article "Icephobicity" was rejected? The comments says:

"This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."

However, the submission DOES summarize the secondary reliable sources (see references), DOES NOT contain opinions or original research and writes about the topic from a neutral point of view. Could you please provide more specifics on which parts of the article read more like an essay than an encyclopedia article? That would help a lot. I wrote and edited in the past articles for various encyclopedias and handbooks (e.g., Springer's Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology) and in my opinion this submission is in an encyclopedic manner. However, I am new in Wikipedia and may misunderstand standards here. So, if you could please provide more comments to me, that would be of great help.

Thanks in advance for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchifat (talk • contribs) 08:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Death by coconut

Thanks for starting Death by coconut. I saw it at DYK and found it quite intriguing. I've become a bit obsessed with it, as you can see from my edits over the past day. If I've included or changed anything that you think is inappropriate, feel free to modify. If you find any other weirdly-interesting topics on which you would like to have a collaborator, feel free to drop me a note. Cbl62 (talk) 17:41, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I really do appreciate it! :) Now you're making me feel bad for not putting in more research time... Thanks for helping beef up the content. I daresay its near GA-class now. Please put yourself in the DYK credits, if you have not done so. Sure thing, Cbl. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 03:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wee Kheng Chiang

The DYK project (nominate) 22:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Hinduism in Karnataka

The DYK project (nominate) 06:32, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Animal furniture for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Animal furniture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal furniture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. teb00007 ^{Talk • Contributions} 14:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Death by coconut

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

An absolutely wonderful article! Smallbones_(smalltalk) 11:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Coconuts

I left a link in my edit summary, but this one (page 207) makes it even more explicit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh. I didn't know Newsweek was into joke sections. ;/ My bad. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• "The best satire is often indistinguishable from reality". (not everyone agrees, but anyways) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:49, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Haha, I think there must be a level of incredulity though... The coconut one seemed plausible, so I did not check if it were real or not, especially since it was a Newsweek piece. I've added back the content, just to different sections. Hopefully that would work. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:56, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• Yep, saw that and made one small change (as there is no evidence that was ever a real issue) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• I was going to remove that but somehow I didn't. Thanks! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of TWG Tea

Hello! Your submission of TWG Tea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cambalachero (talk) 02:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Baby-Roast

Hello! Your submission of The Baby-Roast at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Murder of Liu Hong Mei

Orlady (talk) 00:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Huang Zunxian

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Precious

decay of fiction
Thank you, flirting clown that eats lettuce with barbecue sauce and steamed ice cream, has a nice infobox and an amazing number of spouses, for quality articles such as The Decay of Fiction and Huang Zunxian, and for inspiring reviews, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. It is an honour. :> ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

My DYK? Nomination

I have responded to your comments and concerns about my DYK? nomination here -- Template:Did you know nominations/Jokichi Ikarashi. Please respond to me whenever you'll have a moment. Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Bond 24 at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 17:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

AK?

Hi Bonkers, I recently decided to take a wikibreak from my wikibreak and found AK appears to be blocked??? How did this happen? BTW, my CVUA training from him is still half-way through...! Hz. tiang 11:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Dismally for him, he did certain things that pissed the admin folks off real hard. I hope he takes the block as a learning point... In a positive light, this will keep him more focused on his major exam this year. :/ Wonder if they will accept him back. Fingers crossed; you might wish to privately email him. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

LOL, "take a wikibreak from my wikibreak"?? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of TWG Tea

Hello! Your submission of TWG Tea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Death by ice cream for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Death by ice cream is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death by ice cream until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

• Regards, Iselilja (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for TWG Tea

Alex Shih^Talk 00:03, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of U Kyi Maung

Hello! Your submission of U Kyi Maung at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Biography stubs

Hi Bonkers. I noticed you just created a bunch of one sentence biography stubs (Felipe Checa, Torre Isunza, Eugenio Hermoso, Adelard Covarsí, Antonio Juez Nieto, etc.) with no refs, no cats, no interwiki links. Just a o n e s e n t e n c e a r t i c l e. I'm wondering why you would do that? --Rosiestep (talk) 04:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

To remove the redlinks in Badajoz, I imagine. Although doing this does defeat the point of having red-links, to tell potential editors that they can add that topic to the encylopaedia.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 05:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was my intention. It is indeed similar to leaving it as a red-link, but 1) by doing so more people will edit the page and 2) it looks better blue. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort but if a lot of the links are one liners it looks as if the article writers of Badajoz did it. I wanted it to look as if they at least had small articles. Some stubs with flesh on like Gaspar Mendez is what I was thinking of.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 08:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay then... I will revisit them. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:11, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I was just thinking of some ones like Juan Vespucio. Just a few sentences and sources to make it worthwhile having the stub. I'll try to help you flesh them out a bit today.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 08:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve Wahidin Soedirohoesodo

Hi, I'm SmileBlueJay97. Bonkers The Clown, thanks for creating Wahidin Soedirohoesodo!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add more information regarding Wahidin

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. SmileBlueJay97 (talk) 09:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Your Death by ice cream page is very interesting SmileBlueJay97 (talk) 10:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Always a fan of bubble tea, especially those with lots and lotsa tapioca pearls. :) I can taste in right now... And it was much courteous of you to also remove that flurry of speedy deletion notifications. Hate getting my talk spammed with stuff like that. Cheers! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

More biography stubs

Hi Bonkers, I'm a little concerned about your recent article creation spree. I really have no idea what you would like with the series ''''{{subst:PAGENAME}}''' is now regarded as a National Hero of Indonesia, but I don't think it's a good idea, as they don't even provide basic information on the person, and only mention a single fact. There is also the series with ''''{{subst:PAGENAME}}''' is a Child Ballad which I don't think necessarily gives notability. Did you discuss this with anyone? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

• Agree with these concerns, and tempted to delete the lot of them as not providing context. Bonkers, that's certainly not a good habit to get into. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I must admit that I was a bit bored yesterday. I just felt that blue looked more soothing to the eyes than red, and well that's what transpired after that. But yes, yes, I will get to serious business now. Enough fooling around! Not trying to be stubborn and whatnot, but there is context in that one sentence, right? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Actually, as far as context is concerned, I don't really think so. Especially since it is lacking a primary cause for importance. The National Hero of Indonesia IMO proofs notability, but doesn't show context what the person is important for. X is a Y, and is named as a National Hero of Indonesia is IMO the absolute minimum that is useful. I personally prefer redlinks over substubs, but the jury is hung on that one, and I don't have any data to back up one is more activating than another. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
      • Many editors (especially IPs) think of starting new articles from red links are cumbersome. I think that they would rather edit from an existing article, be it a sentence-long stub, rather than start from scratch an article. In a way, I'm rolling the ball for them to kick. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

RE:Plots

Thank you for your comment on my grammar. As I am short of time, I would like to concentrate on creating content, not worry about the 'was' or 'is' in the prose, although I admit that good grammar is somewhat important in a good article as well. The most pressing problem with this article now is not its grammatical problem- it is its lack of content. Also, if you feel the grammar is so "icky", simply change it yourself as it will not take up too much of your time. There is no need to post a message on the editor's talk page because this might discourage an editor whose command of English is not strong from adding useful content to Wikipedia. Please appreciate the fact that not everyone is as strong as you in their command of the English language. Do help them out instead. Best regards,--Lionratz (talk) 11:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Content and grammar is of parallel importance. I'm just suggesting you read through your edits first. I was thinking of doing it myself, after all I wrote the other parts of the article, but it's better if you edit it yourself. Next time you may wish to take clue from other film articles or you could do some tenses exercises. Not meant to throw a wet blanket at you, just noting. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Anthony Chen

Please take a look at my comments on Template:Did you know nominations/Anthony Chen. violet/riga _^[talk] 19:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Bonkers The Clown, we moved your Teahouse host profile

Hello Bonkers The Clown! Thank you for being a host at the Teahouse. However, we haven't heard from you lately, so our bot has moved your Host profile from the host landing page to the host breakroom. No worries; you can always just Check in and our bot will move your profile back. Editing any Teahouse-related page will do the same thing for you. If you would prefer not to receive reminders like this, you can unsubscribe here. Thanks for your help at the Teahouse! HostBot (talk) 03:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Crime in North Korea

The DYK project (nominate) 00:34, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Art in Paris

The DYK project (nominate) 12:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Crime in South Korea

The DYK project (nominate) 12:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Baby-Roast

Alex Shih^Talk 00:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Here's a treat...

Remember that bald cap image? Though I was not actually in a bald cap for this (they took off my hair in post-production), I am a lead character in Deep Down. I shot my scenes back in September 2012 and it's only now nearing release. The Japanese directors loved me. Check this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbFBEjlKtpY Great fun. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 10:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, how could I forgot that photo! :P Although I regrettably am not an avid fan of video games (I'd rather watch a movie), be sure that I will recommend it to all my gamer friends. It seems like a big project, given that it's Capcom. Are you a playable character though? Love to see you battling dragons. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:20, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Its a new process that is similar to CGI, but based upon footage of the actors themselves to give believability... right down to blinks and breaths and twitches. Full 3D body scans and motion capture at House Of Moves in Los Angeles. They may have made me bald... but the body, movement, mannerisms, and voice ARE all mine. To the thief character, my favorite line: "My useless magic would have me porkin' loins in the old market for one tenth the hassle of your empty venture." We all did plenty more that was not shared in the trailer, but what great fun! Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 11:06, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

That's cool! Shall see if it releases here... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Anthony Chen

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You!

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, Bonkers The Clown! You're receiving The Bronze Wiki and Teamwork Barnstars because you reviewed 581 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 16:57, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Marvel Comics characters: S may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Shou-hsing''', based on the [[[[Old Man of the South Pole]], appears in ''[[Marvel: The End]]'' as a mythological being residing
• Strange defeats the Creators and traps Stygyro in a black hole.<ref>''Doctor Strange'' #26-28 (vol. 2, Dec. - Apr 1974 - 1975 (bi-monthly)</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Win Zaw Oo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Botak Jones logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Botak Jones logo.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mr Bean (soya bean company) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mr Bean (soya bean company), a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for An American Hippie in Israel

Alex Shih^Talk 12:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Botak Jones

Hello! Your submission of Botak Jones at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 15:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK QPQ done

Ping! Thanks, violet/riga _^[talk] 16:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Angel Unchained

Alex Shih^Talk 00:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Special Education (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Lone Wolf in Mexico

Alex Shih^Talk 00:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Botak Jones

Alex Shih^Talk 12:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Psychedelic Priest

Alex Shih^Talk 00:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for La Promenade du sceptique

Hi Bonkers. Any chance you could take another quick look at the nomination for 'La Promenade du sceptique'? Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 01:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zeng Guo Yuan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zeng Guo Yuan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of QatarStarsLeague -- QatarStarsLeague (talk) 18:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Oyster ice cream

		The Food and Drink Barnstar
		Thanks for expanding Wikipedia's coverage of food topics with your creation of the (relatively) new article Oyster ice cream. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Yay thanks! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

1. Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
2. Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
3. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
4. Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
5. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
6. Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
7. Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
8. Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Pukhtoon

Bonkers the Clown, has not heard about Pukhtoon. Pukhtoons are the tribal people living in Pakistan and Afghanistan. If you search on google you will find alot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anwar.malak (talk • contribs) 04:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for enlightening me. I, have now heard about Pukhtoon. I searched on google and I found alot indeed. If you're here to kvetch about me declining your magnum opus, this is the wrong platform. Vent your frustrations on my ignorance here. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Cristóbal Oudrid

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/U Kyi Maung; action needed

Sourcing is needed on the hook facts, and a rewritten hook is needed from you for this nomination; without these, it cannot be approved. Please visit the nomination as soon as possible, and take action accordingly. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• One final ping before this is closed. It's been almost a week since I added this, and no action. This has been hanging fire for weeks now. Hoping you stop by, but not optimistic. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• I appreciate you stopping by. However, we're right back where we were: the new hook is completely unsourced, even if it is interesting. Please rectify this omission within the next 48 hours. Thanks.

Note: it is your responsibility to monitor your DYK nominations, so you know when there are issues and can deal with them. Placing notices here, like the one above, is a courtesy, but when you post a response to a nomination issue, you should check back to see what reply is made by the reviewer. If your Watchlist doesn't work for you, then please try to figure out a way to monitor DYK updates to your nominations in a timely fashion. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:09, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

• ...and it's been four days since you posted. I replied with issues that same day, yet no sign of you since. You really need to take responsibility for your own nominations. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Niggers in the White House

Hello! Your submission of Article at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! IronGargoyle (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Just thought I'd drop a quick note here to see if you were able to do anything about the article length. It is very close to 1,500 characters, so I'm on the fence. If you can't find any more content I will raise the possibility of WP:IARing and see if any other reviewers go for it. Let me know what you think. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kovan double murder

Hello! Your submission of Kovan double murder at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Special Education (song)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

America

really big Mac

Thanks for catching "America". Here is a big Mac for you --->

You will have to get your own fries however. hehehe

--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Appreciated! It tastes a tad too oily though. Skip the fries, I want a sundae. :) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fernán Sánchez de Badajoz

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Fernán Sánchez de Badajoz 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, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Racklever (talk) 11:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/A Night in Terror Tower

I have no idea what you read that made you think this nomination had been approved; it was still waiting for a full review. (Victuallers had some odd idea that plot sections didn't count toward the 1500 requirement, and that's what was being discussed, but nothing else about that article was checked.)

In future, if you think someone failed to enter an approval tick with their review, please post to their talk page and ask them to add it if it was accidentally omitted. There have been occasions when a tick was deliberately omitted because issues remained, or a review wasn't quite complete, and an inquiry helped get the review moving or the issues explained. (And, of course, others where the icon was added after the reminder was given.) Unless you do the review yourself, you shouldn't add the approval icon. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Joke answers at the Science Reference Desk

Hello. You recently posted on the Science reference desk. Jokes that do not answer questions with appropriate scientific references are not appropriate for the science reference desk on our encyclopedia. This is especially important when the question has not yet received any other answer, because it detracts from our ability to focus on the scientific question. Please feel free to contribute to the Reference Desk; humor is even welcomed; but jokes should not take away from the primary goal of answering scientific reference requests. If you don't like the type of focused discussion on the reference desks, there are many other places across the internet where the discussion is less topic-focused. Nimur (talk) 14:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jungle Moon Men

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

About writing and polishing GAs

Of your Singapore-related DYKs, only Ah Boys to Men and Zeng Guo Yuan are potential GAs. However, both have significant prose and organisation issues, which for the latter, affect BLP compliance. Your other DYKs are not properly fleshed out. There is a lot that you need to learn about GA writing, before you can polish potential GAs written by others. Feel free to seek guidance from Jacklee and me. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. So far I have written two good articles, one on a film and the other a BLP, and there are many more still stuck in the nominations queue. I think I am better at writing film articles, so I'd be glad to work more on biographies. However, I do think that other SG DYKs of mine, while not long, have the quality of a good article. And sometimes there is only so much information that can be used to flesh out an article. Definitely, you and Jack have been here longer so yes, I'd be happy to work with y'all. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:24, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Admittedly I can write a lot of GAs if I have enough concentrated time. These things require more effort to be put in, as opposed to writing a sweet 1500 char. DYK. If we collaboratively did a GA, I think that would be more ideal. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:24, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I managed to cover Pathlight School and Ya Kun Kaya Toast with no obvious gaps, in five full paragraphs plus a lead section. Since you had time to write over 100 DYKs, you certainly have the time to write GAs of similar length. Instead of directly collaborating with you on researching and writing an article, I would prefer to offer you advice on GA writing and help you polish your articles once you have fleshed them out. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, sounds good. How about you start helping me to polish Zeng Guo Yuan? Highly encyclopedic and relevant article. Thanks! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I dare not touch that article, which is a mess. How about having separate sections for his medical business and political career? Balance the article with more information that is not controversial, such as which schools he studied at and details of his medical business.

Having written four GAs about Jack Neo movies, I am obviously more interested in polishing Ah Boys to Men. Shall I start by copyediting the Plot section? The Release and Marketing sections should be merged, possibly into a subsection of Production.

Offline sources are often more reliable than online sources. I encourage you to learn to use them when researching, as they may contain a wealth of information that is not available online. Noticed that you used Chinese sources in Ah Boys to Men and a Malay source in Zeng Guo Yuan; well done!

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Thing is I can only find controversial info! The less controversial parts took much digging, trust me. Alright then, go ahead. I actually took clue from Skyfall some time back when writing Ah Boys to Men. Sometimes I do head down to the library to get new books yet to appear on Google Books. Thanks, I consider myself to be tri-lingual, given that I take both Higher Chinese and Bahasa Indonesia (which is largely compatible with Melayu). English is my greatest stronghold, though. :) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I do rely much on offline sources, especially every Monday when Life! runs a full-page interview with a random Singaporean of note. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear that you do rely on offline sources. If non-controversial information is scarce, then I suggest culling excessive details. I realised that Subhas Anandan could be a potential GA. Missed it earlier because it was not a DYK. The Early life and Personal life sections are of adequate length, but the Career section certainly needs expansion. Suggest you do further work on that article (feel free to consult Jacklee, whose specialty is law). --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 01:07, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

A challenge for you!

Here is a list of 10 DYK articles (7 by Sengkang, 3 by AngChenrui) about buildings in Singapore. Rank them by how close they are to GA status. Explain your ranking with reference to how the articles fall short of the GA criteria. Take your time.

• 16 Collyer Quay
• DBS Building
• Gallery Hotel
• Golden Mile Complex
• International Plaza (Singapore)
• People's Park Complex
• SGX Centre
• Stamford House, Singapore
• Tan Teck Guan Building
• TripleOne Somerset

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 16:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Your challenge is humbly accepted. After much deliberation, here is my personal ranking:
Bonkers The Clown's Official Opinion

Article	Ranking	Rationale
16 Collyer Quay	7	Readability is an issue to note here. The length of paragraphs are not consistent at times. Some referenced points in the lead should be left uncited there and instead be mentioned again in the respective sections, per WP:LEAD. Also, the "History" section is largely left unreferenced. Unreliable sources are also used in the article (in no way is WordPress ever reliable). Lastly, there is a useless "External links" section.
DBS Building	6	Only slightly better than the 16 Collyer Quay article. Some referenced points in the lead should be left uncited there and instead be mentioned again in the respective sections, per WP:LEAD. Also, the "Amenities and architecture" section is largely left unreferenced. Unreliable sources are also used in the article (in no way is WordPress ever reliable). Lastly, there is a useless "External links" section.
Gallery Hotel	1	While it does read like an advertisement, this one fares way better in terms of referencing style. I should add, though, that the lead paragraph need not be so excessively cited. Comprehensive work.
Golden Mile Complex	T5	Largely uncited and readability is an eyesore.
International Plaza (Singapore)	10	This one should not even be considered! The whole Amenities and architecture section is a pile of uncited junk. I wonder how this one made the DYK cut.
People's Park Complex	8	The placement of the references is wrong. The references should precede the "Shopping malls in Singapore" template. Secondly, the article is largely unreferenced in both the "History" and "Architecture" sections. When making bold claims like "Largest mall", a reliable source needs to be there! Only slightly better than the International Plaza article.
SGX Centre	9	The sections are so badly titled. This is like an advertorial for the centre. Additionally, the comprehensiveness is just not there. Its qualifications are only a tad higher than the International Plaza article and a tad lower than the People's Park article.
Stamford House, Singapore	T5	Has about the same problems as Golden Mile. The lead can be expanded. The references are good though. Well-illustrated but pity is now well-referenced. Needs to be thoroughly sourced in compliance with WP:V.
Tan Teck Guan Building	3	Greater wealth of information, although it also experiences referencing issues like the rest. The whole "Popular culture" bit is left uncited but forgiveable as the work itself can be argued to be the reference. That said, the "Architecture" section needs referencing no matter what.
TripleOne Somerset	2	Well-written piece but needs a bit more sourcing. Comprehensive.

Conclusion: The DYK reviewers were not so "sticky" in the past. Remember that in general, every paragraph needs to have at least one citation. Personally I think none of them deserve a GA status except for Gallery Hotel and TripleOne. Needs great polishing. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Lone Wolf and His Lady

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Devil Goddess

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Last Frontier Uprising

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Bigger Hair

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Richard Benjamin Harrison

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Richard Benjamin Harrison you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PrairieKid -- PrairieKid (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Howdy. (I didn't write that ^^^.) I wanted to let you know that I finished my initial comments phase. I only have a few minor complaints. Overall, the article is just about there. Only needs a little bit more. Have a good one. PrairieKid (talk) 17:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Repost of Valeria Lukyanova

A tag has been placed on Valeria Lukyanova requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. Hammersoft (talk) 01:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• If you wish to contest the deletion, please follow the instructions on the deletion tag. Removing the deletion tag as you did here is inappropriate. I strongly suggest you read Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Valeria_Lukyanova. Simply because she is known because of her look is insufficient reason to overcome the deletion discussion, as the reason it was deleted is because she is known only for her look. Please see WP:BLP1E. Alternatively, you may wish to take this to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Regardless, simply removing the {{db-g4}} tag because you object to it being tagged so is inappropriate, as the instructions on the tag explicitly state "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself". Please do not do so again. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 15:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Alan Chan

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Tan Boon Sin.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Tan Boon Sin.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Elsie lie.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Elsie lie.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 02:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Valeria Lukyanova for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Valeria Lukyanova is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valeria Lukyanova (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK Nomination Murder Bay

Hello Bonkers the Clown (I side with your father apparently), I see that you're somewhat active on the DYK section. And I'd like some feedback on the DYK section nomination I added for Murder Bay. How did I do? Is it likely to come to pass? What can I do differently? McKay (talk) 13:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

What my father? Ohh, I see. But for some reason I'd rather it was capitalised. Anyways. I've taken a look. Real sorry to disappoint you, but apparently the sticky rule-setters have set out that text spun off from existing articles cannot be considered. :/ Cheer up, take it as a lesson learnt. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:04, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fury of the Congo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Blue Wing Inn

Yeah, I don't know. Perhaps my Uncle is busy, perhaps he's disenchanted with Wikipedia. He drops by occasionally, but the place is better off with him than without him. Every now and then I see his name popping up in some archive, in a complicated deletion or copyright discussion--his comments from years and years ago still make a lot of sense. I don't know the man personally; perhaps he's an old crank, but if he is, he has a wonderful sense of humor and has devoted a lot of time and energy to the betterment of our project. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen the name appear many times in archives too... Was under the impression that he retired. One contributor more is always better than one less. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:11, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Red Obsession

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Allen Law

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Vedanta Society of New York

Hello, where do you want to see the extra comma? Tito☸Dutta 12:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that I have already helped to add. See the hist. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you. You were right I did not see that the Killer Ape was created yesterday. Do you think Sister Christine is GA ready? --Tito☸Dutta 13:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

• Probably yes, although the lead should not deserve so many citations. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Cannibal Attack

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Niggers in the White House

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Niggers in the White House

I shall not use the term "Nigger", which is deemed here to be inappropriate. That's it; nobody is going to harp on it anymore.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
BTC, comments such as this and this are entirely inappropriate; in fact the latter is outright racist. Please cease. GiantSnowman 09:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC) I'd suppose the inappropriateness stems from me using the noun "nigger"... How is uttering it a few times "racist"??? Now, the story would be different if I were to call any black user here a "nigger". But it's different now; all I did was to utter "nigger"! The person who should be scolded is the guy who wrote the poem. If he didn't, I would never have had the chance to do what I did there. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC) The first diff, where you say "niggers" four times in a row, served no purpose at all other than to provoke. In the second diff you refer to black people as "the niggers", which is clearly racist. GiantSnowman 10:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Ah, but I find it to be appropriate only in this case, given that we are discussing about a poem titled "Niggers in the White House", in which "niggers" (as written) are being ridiculed satirically. Hence when I say "niggers" I am obviously referring to the satirical poem's niggers, and not the decent black people in real life. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC) No, you are 'obviously' not. Whether you are referring to fictional characters or real-life people, describing black people as "the niggers" is racist and offensive. GiantSnowman 10:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC) When a poem, or any other text, writes it as "niggers", it is advisable to refer to the "niggers" as "niggers". I was only not wanting to confuse the unregistered user. My good intentions have been misunderstood, sadly. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Your good intentions are indistinguishable from trolling; if you persevere, you *will* be blocked. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC) I am fearful now. So much for writing that one hundred-something DYKs when I get chastised for "trolling". ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC) But you are trolling - I mean why else would you say "niggers niggers niggers niggers" other than to provoke and offend? GiantSnowman 10:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Bonkers, I agree with Salvio here. Unless you are quoting the title of a poem or something, avoid the use of the word "niggers". That is probably one of the most hate-loaded words in the English language (when I was in Grade 9 and we were reading To Kill a Mockingbird out loud, our teacher had us censor both "nigger" and "negro"). Using it, especially ambiguously, will get you blocked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:32, 16 September 2013 (UTC) The problem probably boils down to our cultures. The word "nigger" is very taboo in the U.S. and I think only black people are entitled to say it in public. OMG example 1 May I ask what's the policy here? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC) You have been told what is and isn't appropriate by three editors now; if you still fail to understand that then maybe you shouldn't be editing here. GiantSnowman 10:57, 16 September 2013 (UTC) So I've been here for two years or so, and now you're directing me to CIR. Alright. The cause of this little thread here is the Niggers in the White House article at AfD, and of course the use of the word nigger inappropriately. So here's what: I stop mentioning "nigger" for no reason, and you stop posting here. Case closed and we can now get back to the more important issue — the AfD. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

So what's the deal, then, with No N*ggers, No Jews, No Dogs, which you created days after closing this discussion? — Scott • talk 14:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

• And... he didn't. Redwood did. That being said, the tone of this work is entirely different. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Who? The article history doesn't provide any indication of that, nor is Special:WhatLinksHere of any use in determining the authorship of the article. I take it, then, that Bonkers moved this to mainspace from somewhere else. Are we to take it as a pure coincidence that he chose to effectively create a mainspace page with "Niggers" in the title? — Scott • talk 12:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Reread the article again, particularly the first sentence. As for creating an article with the word N*ggers in the title, are you saying he shouldn't do it at all? Sorry, but the word is in the title of the (notable) work, after all. There's got to be at least 30 or 50 Wikipedia articles with that word in the title (or having that title exactly, such as Nigger (1964 book) and Nigger (2002 book)). Would you have Bonkers stay away from these articles entirely, even if his edits are productive? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
      • The content of the article, and there being other articles with the word "nigger(s)" in the title, are irrelevant. The issue here is this user's use of the word, as discussed above, and which has now even been found on his user page. To answer your question: yes. If this goes on much longer, Bonkers is going to find himself on the receiving end of a block. — Scott • talk 18:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Speaking of which, Crisco, could you help me move the page to the proper "No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs"? (without the asterisk) I can't do it myself. Thanks, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:46, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
        • Yeah, I know you can't. Did you use this source yet? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Auriora Island

Seriously? No references, no categories? GiantSnowman 11:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I've done many of these full stretch. They are seeds that will germinate to seedlings, before becoming trees of knowledge. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Lost Tribe (1949 film)

Hello! Your submission of The Lost Tribe (1949 film) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 18:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ndrova Island

Hello Bonkers The Clown,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Ndrova Island for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Catverine (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I declined speedy; the tags the above editor added are not applicable. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Catverine. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Bonvouloir Islands, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Catverine (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Catverine. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Brumer Islands, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Catverine (talk) 20:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bagaman Island

Hello Bonkers The Clown,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Bagaman Island for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Catverine (talk) 20:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Catverine. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Conflict Group, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Catverine (talk) 20:45, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Notorious Lone Wolf

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Just Before Dawn (1946 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Eric Taylor

Pawn Stars UK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sealand

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

100 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal

		The 100 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Please accept this belated 100 DYK medal. You're almost half way toward your next medal already. Thanks for your contributions! -Zanhe (talk) 00:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Although the postage was delivered a tad late, it still sure is heartwarming to be recognised. Cheers! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations, Bonkers, and well deserved! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, and you too. My 100+ DYKs are only mere candles in comparison to your 1000 Suns. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Well some of your candles and my suns are overlaps, so that's a bright light! Let's do some more. Are there any notable buildings in Singapore which don't have an article yet? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hm, agreed. :) While I'm not interested in historical architecture, would you be interested in working on a shopping mall article? After all it's still a building. The article does not exist yet; shall create it. The mall is called JEM, the "crown jewel of the west" that had its ceilings caving in very recently. Google returns loads of results, should be easy stuff. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Ditto that, someone created it already. Not possible to expand. I dunno about Singapore, perhaps its too small to have so many buildings to write about. On the other hand, there are many notable Singaporeans who have yet to see their own article. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:21, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

• Bonkers, considering how much was doable for Gibraltar (much smaller than Singapore) I would be surprised if no more could be written. Yogyakarta is a fair size city (500k-ish people) and I know there are numerous buildings which don't have an article yet (Great Mosque of Yogyakarta, Kota Gede Mosque, and Bintaran Church for starters... and that's not even getting into the museums and monuments). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

• Yea, true that, but I'd suppose the easy ones to write have already been written. What's left are those lesser-known buildings I might not even know of. If one day I have no more films to write about, I'll refer to this handy directory. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Well done!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Can you suggest a notable female Singaporean who has yet to see her own article? Also any and all notable structures, shopping malls, etc. are interesting to me. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Lee Bee Wah. Quite surprised she did not have an article until today. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Voodoo Tiger

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Young Eagles (film)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Recent Good Article nominations of your film articles

Bonkers The Clown, I noticed that One Dangerous Night, which is requiring a fair amount of work to achieve DYK standard, has been nominated for Good Article status. Just by looking at it, I can assure you that the article is miles away from being a GA. The plot, an appropriate length, is over half the total length of the article, the production section is mostly a list in prose form of who did what, and the Release section references a couple of sources with virtually no content from them. This is a Start-class article, and would need a fair amount of expansion to bring it up to C-class level. I recommend that you look at other GA film articles to see the structure, quantity and quality of information included, and so on—if you believe that the article is ready to be a Good Article, then you need to better understand just what a Good Article entails.

I am requesting that you withdraw this article as a GA nominee, and also the nominations of the five other films you've nominated that follow this structure: The Notorious Lone Wolf, Devil Goddess, Fury of the Congo, Voodoo Tiger, and ‪Killer Ape (film)‬. (You can withdraw by simply deleting the "GA nominee" template from the article's talk page.) Although a better article, the nomination of The Medico of Painted Springs is unlikely to succeed unless it is given major additions; I'd put the article at a C-class level, currently, and though it is clearly superior to the others I would nevertheless suggest (rather than request) you withdraw it as well. If you still want to pursue it, I won't stop you. One example: the paragraphs on reception need much more depth. They also need to be internally consistent: You first state that the film received mixed contemporary reviews, and then quote only one, which is negative. The statement has to be reflected in the examples given. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Don't the two books count as reviews? K, will heed your advice and reddit them all. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. The two books do count as reviews, but not contemporary reviews (reviews published when the movie was first released). For mixed contemporary, you want a balance of reviews from that time. Alternatively, if a later source summarized the contemporary reviews as mixed, you could simply source that assertion, and then run Variety's, perhaps as an example of a less enthusiastic review. Having reviews from later book publications, if available, is always a good idea. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Look at my recent City Lights and The Haunting (1963 film) for what is expected. I strongly suggest that you withdraw them all from GAN, even Medico.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:13, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Killer Ape (film)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Medico of Painted Springs

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Lee Bee Wah

Well that was fun and I learned something about a Singaporean politician! Thanks for inviting me on this one. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping add some more content too! There's always more if you're interested. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for One Dangerous Night

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Admin noticeboard about your userpage coming up in search results

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See WP:AN#Barak "Magic Nigga" Obama OSborn ^arf_contribs. 16:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Pawn Stars UK DYK review

Hello! Your submission of Pawn Stars UK at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

DYK for The League of Frightened Men (1937 film)

The DYK project (nominate) 20:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Lone Wolf Keeps a Date

The DYK project (nominate) 04:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Lost Tribe (1985 film)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:33, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Valeria Lukyanova

The DYK project (nominate) 12:34, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Charles Chan (businessperson)

Hello! Your submission of Charles Chan (businessperson) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:17, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Blocked

I have just indefinitely blocked this account for trolling; if you want to appeal this block, please use the {{unblock}} template. Reviewing admin, please see this discussion before unblocking. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 20:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your talk page shows that you are "currently experiencing health issues that may affect your ability to work on Wikipedia". I can see why. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Bonkers The Clown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Salvio Giuliano has unfortunately let his anti-racism/trolling values cloud his thinking. Me, a troll? Sure, a troll who has faithfully been with the rest of Jimbo's team for 2 years. A troll who has been slogging out some 300 odd decent articles, 150 odd DYKs, and 2 GAs. 2 years of good faith, overshadowed by some sad accusations of me being a racist/troll. I'm not a racist, and what our dear Italian admin had done is quoting out of context. And furthermore, I did accommodate to early requests, which I deemed as very reasonable. Before the block was, without consensus, dished out, I had already stopped being "silly". But no, Salvio disregarded that. I thank those who defended my position at AN, such as The Devil's Advocate and Paul B, not being foolishly swayed by mentions of me saying "nigger". For those who blindly chastised me, perhaps you should deepen your shallow thinking. May the reviewing admin have prudence. If I am unblocked, I will continue editing as usual. Om namaste. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have not recognised that your conduct has been problematic. You have given little assurance that the conduct will not be repeated in the future. You have attacked the blocking admin. And you are still using the problematic n-word. Your request for unblock is declined. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Definitely a misguided block length...no comment on the block itself cause I don't know the history but I will say my interactions with Bonkers have been positive at the various AFD's and such. First block and we set an indefinite though seems questionable at the least. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

• "If I am unblocked, I will continue editing as usual"? A lack of remorse is not going to get you an unblock. How about admitting that your repeated use of the word "nigger" was unneeded and unacceptable in a community where many people find it very offensive. I've seen people chastised for a lot less, and to be frank, you should have seen it coming repeatedly using the word like you did. An unblock request should show that you are not going to be repeating the same behavior that got you blocked in the first place, so maybe you should clearly state that, not that you are going to be continue on without modifying your behavior. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 11:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bonkers. Whilst it's certainly within the realms of possibility that you genuinely weren't originally aware of the offensive nature of the word "nigger" (nor for that matter of the upset people might feel on encountering a username with a swastika in it), I think it should be clear to you by now that the Wikipedia community considers your use of the term deeply inappropriate. Many users find it personally offensive. Sticking to your guns against politically-correct censorship is one thing, but Wikipedia isn't the place to fight such a campaign; it's a community-led encyclopedia-building project. No matter how useful your contributions (and I don't think anyone's going to deny that you're a prolific contributor here), if you can't work peacefully within the community, you won't be allowed to work at all. Your use of the n-word has been roundly condemned by other editors, and if you want to continue editing here (which I hope you do) then I'm afraid you're going to have to accept that and stop using it. Just take it out of your vocabulary: avoid writing articles on subjects related to it, avoid discussions about it, take any mention of it off your userpages and go about your business normally. Based on the ANI discussion, I can't see anyone unblocking you until you agree to such a course of action. You might find that a willingness to abide by a voluntary topic-ban on any race-related subjects (as has been suggested) would accelerate the unblock process. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Some advice

I am sad, but not at all surprised at this turn of events. I warned you this would happen, Bonkers. AK is indeffed, and now you are as well. Go and have a look at that discussion on AN carefully. Before you said anything, consensus was against a topic ban. It went the other away to you being blocked principally because of your own conduct.

As Moe Epsilon rightly said, "If I am unblocked, I will continue editing as usual." has a pretty much 100% guarantee of your unblock request being declined. As Yunshui also said, you will not get unblocked until you acknowledge that you did something wrong. Your next unblock request should explicitly acknowledge :

• Calling other users certain words can be construed as personal attacks and unacceptable anywhere on Wikipedia
• Acknowledge other people take offence at things you think are acceptable, and agree to avoid the subject
• Say you will refrain from using all noticeboards, especially AN and ANI, and stick to writing articles. List the articles you would like to improve. Ideally, mention one you would want to take to GA and the sources you would like to use.
• Above all, an unblock request has to be about you. It has to acknowledge that your behaviour was out of line. Don't mention anybody else's behaviour at all, it's almost certain the unblocking admin will smell a rat and decline it.

If you can't manage that, then I'm afraid your Wiki career is over and I wish you well with whatever else you choose to do. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Please reconsider

I came by to notify Bonkers a comment I left at his DYK nomination, but was shocked by the dramatic turn of events. I've had some limited interactions with Bonkers at DYK and have been impressed by his prolific contributions. I never noticed until now that he had an unhealthy fascination with the n-word. It is truly deplorable, but I also find the punishment (indef block) unduly severe, considering the fact that people living in countries with little black population are not always aware how offensive the n-word is. In fact, the only place where they're likely to hear the word is probably Hollywood movies, in which it is commonly used by black people among themselves in an affectionate manner.

Considering how much contribution Bonkers has made to Wikipedia, I think he deserves a chance to redeem himself, on the condition that he fully recognizes the severity of the issue. As Yunshui has suggested above, I think an indefinite topic ban on race-related topics would be appropriate. -Zanhe (talk) 21:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I am in agreement Yunshui, Bonkers has been an exceptional contributor over the years and a permanent block seems a bit harsh. I think he should be given a chance to retract his comments and resume his editing career here. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 21:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

indefinite does not necessarily mean permanent. If Bonkers can show some understanding of what was wrong with what they were doing and pledge not to do it again I am sure they could find their way to being unblocked. If instead they continue to deny the problems and attack others the chances of that are basically zero. It was, is, and continues to be Bonkers own decisions that will decide if they remain blocked or not. Content contribution is great and we all appreciate it, but if it we can't get the good content contribs without the racist trolling, personal attacks, etc, then it's just not worth it. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Horrible, horrible block (but that can be said about 99% of non-vandalism blocks). Beeblebrox is right that indefinite doesn't necessarily mean permanent. However, that's the only part of his comment that's correct. To be unblocked Bonkers will need to prostrate himself before the blocking admin, swear fealty, and promise to do exactly as he's told for life plus ten days. We have a handful of good admins here, but they're clearly a diminishing minority. Most of them–yes most, not some– think that this is their encyclopedia and those who wish to actually write it must first and foremost acknowledge that they They are in charge. Bonkers has behaved like a horse's ass at times, but an indefinite block to someone with a clean block-log and as much content-contribution as he, is disgusting and unacceptable. The Wikipedia will be worse-off without Bonkers, but Bonkers will be better off without this fucking clown-academy. Joefromrandb (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Could not agree with this sentiment more. I have been watching Bonkers for a while, and have worked with him in a few instances. I have really enjoyed it. Yes, he has been cooky, but I took it as humor. Yes, he made a racist remark, but I think that we as a society are far too sensitive about race. (I'll write a book about my feelings some time, and let y'all know.) In terms of sheer number of edits, Bonkers far outweighs 95% of editors on here. When we consider those edits, the COUNTLESS DYKs, the GAs, and other major contributions, Bonkers appears to be one of the best editors on WP. When considering his personality, if nothing else, he is the most interesting editor I have come across on WP. I might not have even considered a block. Warnings, sure, a discussion, sure. But a block? Probably not. I understand that editors should not be exempt from blocks based on experience, but it certainly helps. Very bad block. Bonkers, thank you for the laughs and the contributions. The Administrators are overstepping boundaries here and I DO NOT support it. See you in Thailand! PrairieKid (talk) 02:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I think it is a shame that are users here so naive that they could even think about trying to defend what Bonkers has been doing. And so we're clear, what he has been doing is deliberately trolling, trying to cause problems, and hoping that people who only knew his content work and not his race-baiting would do exactly what you are doing right now. I'm sorry you apparently can't see how you've been played here, I have to admit it was a pretty well thought out troll that took considerable effort in the form of actually quality contributions to the project. But it is still an deliberate attempt to troll Wikipedia, of that I have absolutely no doubt. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's it. He spent years writing content, creating article after article, volunteered literally thousands of hours of his time so that he could race-bait and hope people would defend him. Simply unbelievable. No wonder you fucked up that Côte D'Ivoire discussion. I spent the past year thinking you supervoted it to the title you preferred, but given your incredibly bizarre interpretation of this situation, I'm beginning to think you actually interpreted consensus that way. Another admin that apparently shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a block button. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:39, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request 2

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Bonkers The Clown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Alright folks. Shall I try again? I have undergone extensive self-reflection and pseudo-enlightenment, I have attained. To the dear reviewing admin, I promise to: * refrain from using all noticeboards, especially AN and ANI, and stick to writing articles. In all honesty, when writing the Niggers in the White House article, I just wanted to notch up the page view statistics. As simple as that. I did not have any racist agenda. I was inspired by the The Negro Motorist Green Book, which unsurprisingly made its way up to the top of DYKSTATS. However, seeing the unnecessary trouble this has caused, I shall no longer write any controversial race-related articles, i.e. anything with Niggers or Negroes in its title. I shall no longer use the term "Nigger" in talk pages unnecessarily, unless the context asks for me to do so. * note that in the fabulous US of A and elsewhere in the world, "niggers" is unanimously deemed as a extremely pejorative term. What I did was pushing the envelope too far. I remorsefully admit that I was wrong. I ask for a second chance, instead of a agonising indef block. I sincerely apologise to everyone who has felt offended by my actions. May He bless ye. I hope that you will also consider my constructive two years' worth of contributions here. Thank you. I hereby sign off, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Accept reason:

See below — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd be happy to unblock based on the above. However, given the degree of community input into this case, a unilateral unblock might cause more issue than it resolves. I'm therefore posting here and asking for input from one or two other admins involved with the case before going ahead. To reiterate, though, I personally have no problems unblocking Bonkers based on the above guarantees. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• Don't mind unblocking, but Bonkers: you'd be on a very short leash. Particularly if your "enlightenment" was only pseudo-enlightenment. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• If I was fully enlightened, in the sense of the word, I'd no longer be typing this. I would have ascended to the ranks of Siddhartha Gautama. Thus, I am enlightened but not enlightened. Anyways I have learnt this lesson well. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:12, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• Chuckle. Good point, though I note that the most common use of "enlightenment" in English is not necessarily spiritual (hence the concern over "pseudo-enlightenment"). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to unblock, as long as it is spelled out very clearly that any lapses in the above promises will be swiftly met with a reblock. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

You have my word. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Pinging @Yunshui:! Man, I'm dying to edit many pages, especially the many ongoing DYK noms on my watchlist. So, pretty please with salt on top, can you, or another kind admin, speed the action up? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• I don't believe this person for a minute, but, yes, let's give him WP:ROPE. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I think you're ignoring the entirety of BOnkers work here...a short term block for this maybe but you jumped an indef block on someone with a clean block record...something is out of whack with that I don't know if he just rang your bell but it was a bit punitive and harsh in my opinion..Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Salvio; if Bonkers messes up again you can be sure that there are many admins and even more people than you watching his actions. We have made it clear that Bonkers is on thin ice here and if he falls through said ice I would advise you to let someone else notice this lest you be accused of a WP:INVOLVED block! PantherLeapord|My talk page|My CSD log 09:28, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't want this troll ever using the word "nigger" on this site ever again. Or "coon". Or coming within cooie of anything to do with race, especially in article space. Never mind the

I shall no longer write any controversial race-related articles, i.e. anything with Niggers or Negroes in its title. I shall no longer use the term "Nigger" in talk pages unnecessarily, unless the context asks for me to do so.

Bonkers,

• please commit to never writingediting race-related articles, whether you deem them to be controversial or not.
• please commit to never using "nigger" or any other derogatory racial epithet for any reason in any space

--Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 09:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I can do without using the term "nigger", but "race-related articles"? That's too vague. Most everything biographical has got to do with race here. e.g. so and so is a politician of Indian heritage. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

An article about an Indian politician is not about race or racial issues. If race is an issue relevant to that politician (her policies, for instance) then leave it for someone else. No one will have a problem with you saying she is Punjabi - unless that's particularly controversial. To be clear, I'm talking about editing and discussing race-related content - not just writing new articles. Do you agree? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 09:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Edited condition above for clarity. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Bonkers, I think it would be reasonable if you would commit to these two conditions for at least 6 months. Then we can get to unblocking you per the consensus developing on this page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:06, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I irrevocably agree. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I'd like it to be indefinite. You may ask to have these conditions dropped at AN after 6 months. Agreed? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:12, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Anthonyhcole, if he can stay out of trouble for six months then I think it is reaonable for the restriction to be lifted. If he can not keep to the restriction then it will likely become a permanent topic ban. But I don't think we need to have this discussion now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I am an epitome of high virtue and discipline beyond belief. (I say this with a straight face) I believe in prisoners leaving the prison on their own once their term is over. Agreed? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

No. We, this community that I know you value, and who values you for both who you are and the work you do, we are mightily pissed off with you and you have lost our trust. If you want to start discussing racial issues, editing racial content, or using negative racial epithets here after 6 months has elapsed, come back to us and ask. And we'll take a look at how you've been doing and, assuming you've lived up to your commitment, and haven't otherwise further lost our trust or respect, you can expect to be given the OK. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:24, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

An example of hasty generalisation. But never mind, I agree. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean, "hasty generalisation"? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

You generalise "we" to mean you and the rest who supported a topic ban/block. Are you forgetting that this community you speak of is not just limited to these people? I am thankful to have fellow editors speak up for me. But that's not important. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Do you think you're the victim of some injustice here? Do you think most of the community doesn't agree with what I've just put to you? Read back over the AN thread. Don't put too much store in the Devil's Advocate, though. He'll stand up for anybody (hence the name). And he does it very well. (I hope he's around when I'm in your shoes.) You have behaved beyond the pale. I hope you can take that on board. Anyway, get back to work slacker. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Unblocking

Bonkers the clown, I will shortly be unblocking your account. In light of your extensive contributions here, most editors would like you to have another chance. Any return to the controversial, provocative and disruptive actions that triggered this incident will be met by swift reblocking. In addition you have committed yourself to the following restrictions:

• not discussing or editing any race-related content
• not using any derogatory racial epithet anywhere for any reason

These may be appealed to the adminstrators' noticeboard after six months. Welcome back — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I will remember your deed. May whatever deity you worship bless you and the rest who deserve to be blessed. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to get back late to the party - real life intervened a bit. Thanks for stepping in, Martin, and Bonkers, welcome back. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• Bonkers, the terms of your unblock mean even a comma at "No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs" is terms for a reblocking. I really don't want to be the one to pull the trigger. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• I'm quite willing to pull the trigger. That was your *one* boundary-testing edit. The next one will result in an indef block, with no talk page or email access. The time for fucking around is over. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Third that. That edit shows a complete lack of common sense (the good faith interpretation). --regentspark (comment) 13:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

So if Bonkers wanted to assist our group with an article on a Papua New Guinean language or ethnic group he can't because he's somehow a racist and must be banned at all costs from race-related articles because what, he'll implant racial hatred into it? Sorry I really don't understand the topic ban, this seems to have created rather a mess which is unnecessary. Creating articles like No Niggers, No Jews, No Dogs and using terms related to race on wikipedia is never a good idea, but Bonkers has a history of creating interesting and quirky articles but never to my knowledge would he ever insert non encyclopedic or offensive material into an article. I agree with him not using such words again and not creating articles which some might find racially offensive but to ban him from all race-related articles, given that he has a great legitimate record of content creation doesn't seem appropiate. If he wanted to do some work on African ethnic groups (badly needed on here) he can't (even though his work would undoubtedly be fine and beneficial to wikipedia?). He deserves another chance IMO to not do this sort of again. He should be free to edit any article he chooses, provided that he continues to do the work that he does, but I think a warning that if he ever does anything like this again he'll be blocked indefinitely would suffice. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I misread the discussion, but my assumption is that "race-related" really means "race relations related". Bonkers can write about any subject as long as race relations doesn't affect that subject. Ryan Vesey 21:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

A bunch of people here have concluded that Bonkers is some sort of vicious racist who'll carry his purported racial agenda into articles when from what I can see it basically comes down to a lack of maturity and sense. Can I also point out that Bonkers is not White British or American he's from Singapore and it is possible that he isn't well-accustomed to what Americans and Brits find super offensive and our culture. I think he is likely aware that a lot of people are offended by words like "nigger", but I think it comes down to a lack of judgment/awareness of how he is perceived and a maturity issue rather than him having some serious racial agenda. It probably seemed humorous to him, rather than intending to be seriously offensive.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

That's one way of looking at it Dr. B. An alternative way is to see that Bonkers, though a well meaning chap, has shown a lack of sensitivity to issues involving race and has got into trouble because of that. When a person ends up in that sort of situation, the correct social norm is to be extra careful how you go around phrasing things. In this context, Bonkers would do well to be extra careful where and how he edits. That's just the way the world works and it doesn't necessarily mean that he is a racist or that the rest of us have maturity issues. --regentspark (comment) 21:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem here, and I agree to some extent with the concerns, is then apparently Bonkers continued to use the term several times even though he was told it was really offending people and does seem insensitive to the issue but as I say I think it comes down to lack of maturity rather than him actually being a racist. Bonkers you should know better than to wind up the community over something like race. You're too valuable to wikipedia to let a stupid thing like this affect your editing. Find some other way to "play" which doesn't affect more serious-minded people... I know you don't mean any harm, but wikipedia really isn't the sort of place you can really joke about things like this. From what I see though he hasn't actually broken the rules of editing and actually inserted racism or false contentious information into actual articles and while that article name is very offensive, I can't see where he made light of it within an article itself with original research which wasn't in a source. So I don't think he should be banned from editing race-related articles, just advised to stop using such words and to not create any further articles with such titles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

No Dr. Blofield, you obviously haven't read the full discussion. The discussion is not whether Bonkers is a racist, it is whether he is a troll. A troll doesn't have to believe any of the crap they spout, as long as it is offensive and it provokes a reaction. So despite the articulate defence provided by the Devils Advocate about Bonkers not being a racist, it is all quite malplaced, since this is not at all what it is about. It is whether this particular editor trolls just for the sake of it. Any amount of constructive edits does not make up for such an agenda. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the sum of his work to date makes it very clear that he isn't really a true troll, and if you think he is, you clearly have little experience of him and what he does here. Yes, I think Bonkers thought it was funny to create controversial sounding articles and childishly enjoyed seeing the community overreact and slap the cuffs on him which could be interpreted as trolling, but when it comes down to it, I think he knows when he's crossed the line and would rather continue to edit here. To block him indefinitely over something like this would be a serious lack of judgement in encyclopedic terms. He doesn't exactly do this sort of thing daily does he and if you really examine his contributions, 99% of what he does here is constructive. He's a young lad who still lacks maturity over certain things, but that doesn't make him a troll who has a habit of provoking reactions from people. A quick "stop being an idiot, you can't make light of race here and get away with it, grow up" should suffice rather than an indefinite block or even a topic ban.... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can see that "Stop being an idiot" message has been relayed to him countless of times before this incident. It seems this block is the first measure that has had any noticeable effect on the determination of the editor in regards to him trolling. But the terms has been given in the unblock. I am willing to defer to your interpretation with time, if this proves to be a singular instance with no follow-ups. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, I think Rosie's message below rings true, and he seems more responsive to her.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Breeze Barton

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Breeze Barton

The article Breeze Barton has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of any notability, article only sourced to primary sources and wikis.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 08:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

And look, it appeared on the Main Page as a DYK fact! So nah, ain't gonna bother. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

A message to Bonks from Rosie

A latte while you think things over.

Hey there. We've got a mess here. Please reflect on the situation and take as long as you need before you make a decision on how you want to move forward as a wikipedia editor. I hope you decide to stay clear of the pesky word(s), and pesky articles with pesky words, and perceived trolling. I hope you decide to keep writing interesting, challenging articles. I hope you find positive ways to rack up page views. But at the end of the day, when all is said and done, you're in control of your wikipedia future. The choice is yours. Best, --Rosiestep (talk) 01:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I've think I'm back to the right track now. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Even if you are on the right track; you'll get run over if you just stand there! PantherLeapord|My talk page|My CSD log 09:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hsien of the Dead, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Business Times (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lee Bee Wah

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5