User talk:De728631/2013

This is an archive of past discussions with User:De728631. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives

2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

Quenya

Hi, the work you're doing on Quenya looks good. I just wanted to make sure that you know that if you disagree with any of my suggestions in the review or would like me to clarify anything I've said that you can just ask. I don't see the review as the kind of exercise where I say what you must do to pass the bar and you have to comply - rather I see it as a chance to collaborate to improve the article. So if there are particular things you disagree with or don't know how to implement let's just discuss it at the review page. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Maunus, I was going to leave you a few comments on the review page but somehow I was always too busy and forgot about it. Anyhow, thanks a lot for doing this job in the first place. Please see my response at the review site. De728631 (talk) 09:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I am doing some rather heavy editing now, and I just want you to know that if you disagree with anything I do - i.e. if you think that it does not constitute and improvement to the article please feel free to revert it - then we can discuss it on the review page. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

That's cool, and thanks a lot for your massive help. Please let me know when there are some especially challenging issues to be solved. De728631 (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, regarding the review I am at a point where I am seeing that I cannot pass the article before the grammar section is rewritten to form a more coherent overview. It simply is to incoherent to be useful to a reader - one can read the entire section and not feel that one has an idea of how the language works. I don't currently have the time to rewrite this myself and it probably will be a couple of weeks before I do, so I would like to ask you whether you have the time and will to try out your hand at rewriting it, whether you have the patience to wait a couple of weeks for the review to conclude when I have had a chance to rewrite the grammar section, or whether you would prefer me to fail the review now so that you can renominate it later?·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I think at this point I'm going to opt for a second opinion since I really don't see any need nor possibilities to improve the coherence of this section without simply adding many unnecessary fillers. This may be a matter of taste which we've already debated on the review page. So if another reviewer recommends further copyediting in terms in terms of coherence as well, then I'm going to try it myself. My time is also a bit limited but rather than letting the review fail now, I'll try to get the article improved. De728631 (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I understand that. The reason that I don't think I can pass the article as is, is that I know that User:G Purevdorj who has reviewed articles for me in the past would not pass this article in its current state. It is not about adding unnecessary fillers, it is about writing readable prose, and organizing information in a way that makes it accessible to people without prior knowledge. It is also not just copyediting I am asking for, but a substantial rewrite. If this were a peer review for a journal my verdict would be "revise and resubmit". I think you should ask for a second opinion, but I would encourage you to find a reviewer who knows linguistics and who has worked on language related articles. I'll refrain from editing the article while we wait for more input.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I have added a request for a second opinion. Best, ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, let's see what others think about it. De728631 (talk) 19:55, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, De728631. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thanks for nominating and curating the article, and congratulations with the GA. You did great. I will cntinue to do some minor copyediting when I have more time, but I do think it is a valuable and worthy article. Well done!

Credits for The Hobbit Soundtrack

Hello De728631,

There is all credits information in digital booklet & album cover of Hobbit soundtrack but there isn't exist in Wikipedia. Example: Misty Mountain song composed by PLAN 9, not Howard Shore. Besides, "Song of the Lonely Mountain" song adapted from this song (I mean, "based on" / co-written). Unfortunately, I'm not so good at English, therefore, I cannot add to Wikipedia. Could you add the following credits infomations? Thanks.

As screenshot from the digital booklet and cover of the album: http://i.imgur.com/RJVOJ.jpg

As text;

All compositions by Howard Shore except:

Portions of Disc 1: Tracks 8, 12; Disc 2: Tracks 5, 17 contain excerpts of the
“Misty Mountains” song composed by David Donaldson, David Long, Steve Roche and Janet Roddick.

“Blunt the Knives”
Lyrics by J.R.R. Tolkien
Music Composed by Stephen Gallagher
Performed by Jed Brophy, Adam Brown, John Callen, Mark Hadlow, Peter Hambleton, Stephen Hunter, William Kircher, Graham McTavish, James Nesbitt, Dean O’Gorman, Ken Stott, Aidan Turner
Produced by Stephen Gallagher
Mixed by Ed Cherney 

“Misty Mountains”
Lyrics by J.R.R. Tolkien
Music Composed by David Donaldson, David Long, Steve Roche and Janet Roddick
Performed by Richard Armitage With Jed Brophy, Adam Brown, John Callen, Mark Hadlow, Peter Hambleton, Stephen Hunter, William Kircher, Graham McTavish, James Nesbitt, Dean O’Gorman, Ken Stott and Aidan Turner
Produced by Plan 9 and David Long
Mixed by Ed Cherney

“Song of the Lonely Mountain”
Lyrics by Neil Finn
Music Composed by Neil Finn, David Donaldson, Steve Roche, Janet Roddick and David Long
Performed by Neil Finn
Produced by Neil Finn, Elroy Finn, Liam Finn
Mixed by Dave Fridmann
Recorded and engineered by Jason Huss at Roundhead 
Strings performed by the London Metropolitan Orchestra
Conducted by James Brett
Orchestra Leader: Tom Kemp
Strings Recorded and Mixed by Lewis Jones
Assistant Engineer: Toby Hulbert
Strings Arranged by Victoria Kelly

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pureocan (talk • contribs) 19:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note about the detailed credits. The problem is however that I'd rather like to see the CD booklet myself as an original print, or at least published by a reliable online source, and not by some random image sharing site. And we cannot link to the url you provided because the scan of the CD booklet is an infringement of copyright. So unfortunately I think we will have to keep the credit lines as they are. Wikipedia is built on reliable sources that can be verified, and I at least can't check whether the scan you state above is actually true. By the way, even the publisher Water Tower Music credits only Shore and Neil Finn, so for the time being this should be sufficient until we get some verifiable credits. De728631 (talk) 21:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed information. I understand the situation. If you could write to you personally, I would send to you Digital Booklet file (Or Google search: caG8IPuO dc262 **you could delete this part after seeing it**). Of course, this booklet is copyrighted. Therefore, I did a lot of research. There is many sources as "reliable source". Here listing (I hope, can be the Reliable Source any of these sites);

Thanks a lot for your efforts. On a general note, blogs, forums, fan sites and user-based websites are generally not considered reliable sources, simply because there is no controlling authority for the content they publish. Neither do we use commercial links with a price tag on the site like Amazon or Onlinesheetmusic as a reference; e.g. Discogs has explicitely been ruled out as a reliable source, see here. So a lot of those new links cannot be used either. The Google search you provided looks promising an quite original, and it matches your first link to imgur.com . So I'm now going to quote the album booklet without using a weblink, which is actually alright. De728631 (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

IronKnuckle SPI block

If the checkuser came back as false, is the Looks like a duck to me evidence strong enough for a ban? We have just one AFD comment? Suspicious yes, but proven? Gaijin42 (talk) 17:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's still suspicious but please see this addendum to my block rationale. De728631 (talk) 17:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for semi-protecting my talk page for a couple of weeks. That should help cut down on vandalism from the socks that are being created so quickly. 72Dino (talk) 00:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome. De728631 (talk) 00:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Requesting

You know, sometimes if you kindly ask an editor to expand an article instead of being a complete asshole drilling deletion warnings at established editors you might get more of a response and you might find more editors like you..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You know,

This user
templates the regulars.

because templates are a convenient, neutral and fast way to convey a message. And I was actually going to add a custom message to your talk page after finding some more stubs that don't look notable either.

To those watching my talkpage, please ignore the "asshole" bit since we've recently had enough drama in terms of civility. De728631 (talk) 22:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)}}

You're missing the point. We are here to build an encyclopedia together. Friendly, constructive collaboration is far more important than convenience and neutrality. Templating the regulars I find rude and overbearing, its not excusable in my book. It makes it look as if you resent the edits of others, rather than trying to build upon what they've started. If you are having problems with civility I'd say it is likely you are too heavy handed in your approach. Sometimes functioning more as a human being than a robot towards other editors might help. Think about it.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:30, 25 January 2013 s(UTC)

Point taken, but it seems we're completely disagreeing here about the reception of templates. Another matter of personal taste that has to be taken into account. If I was actually resenting your edits and was uninterested in them I could've simply ignored your talk page at all. E.g. I can't stand it when people mark a new page for speedy deletion and don't inform the OP, let alone the frequent lack of notifications about not creating articles in another language. That is where editors really aren't interested in other people's contributions. And as mentioned above, this templated message on your page was only the starting point for a personal message to follow. It was just that you responded before I could add anything else. On a side note, I don't have problems with civility but I was referring to the recent drama fests at the administrators' noticeboard. De728631 (talk) 23:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. Thanks for your assistance with the rationales.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

CCM article

Thank you for getting involved with the Contemporary Christian music article (the notice you posted at the top of the article). Would I be able to remove the "about.com" remark without any problems? It was told to Walter that it can't be used but is still there after several days. It's a poorly sourced/typed "quote" by someone who isn't even experienced with the genre on a highly ad-filled site. Also, there are two other points I made on the article that were not sourced that the user claims comes from books he owns. In addition to that, I actually included info that wasn't overly quoted about early influences of the genre that are reliable (from NY Times for instance), the artist's websites, music websites (ie. MTV) and CCM websites as well, not to mention included in related articles within Wikipedia already. I'm confused why some sections are kept and others are removed. Then I've been threatened with warnings and blocks as I'm trying to get to the bottom of it which I haven't appreciated. Would just like someone unbias to take a look at it all and fix it, not just ignore it with distractions about insignificant issues or make suggestions that don't pertain to my inquiries (ie. about creating an account or whatever). I appreciate your help and have a great day... 99.129.112.89 (talk) 22:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I also been have been using About.com as a source when I was told by fellow editor that a specific guide on there was actually reliable. So it seems that there are conflicting opinions about this source. I would suggest that you wait for the topic at the reliable sources board be either closed or archived since the discussion there has only recently been started. In the meantime it would be a good idea to find other, reliable sources that make similar statements like Kim Jones, so could actually replace the About.com sources instead of removing the entire text part. That said, my problem with the article is that entire sections are made up of loosely arranged quotations of original text: "Statment 1". "Statement 2". And so on; that's now how an article should be written. On the other hand I have to agree with Walter about what he wrote here. Many of those sources are actually unreliable. De728631 (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You both aren't realizing those were removed sources I just listed. I did not need him to respond to them or justify why they are bad. However, some of those sources he had to click on BIO or scroll down. Regardless, the info I included is from the actual singer's articles already (such as about Gaither being an influence: [1] and Happy Goodman's sourced via MTV and NY Times). Those can not be disputed. It was at first about the sources, then it became about the content to him. I put it in a new section and that still wasn't good enough. Why should I have to come up with better sources to something poorly written without a valid source that he's trying to keep in the article? He didn't do that with me. My entry wasn't left until I fixed it per an editor's instructions, but then it was just reverted again and I was warned for edit warring when it was him doing it without discussing it first. He was flip-flopping and power-tripping about what I was right about. He's the one who needs to come up with a better source or remove it. But he hasn't. This is what I'm upset about and is a "double-standard". But you both are misunderstanding that you're arguing sources I haven't even included in the "Diversity within CCM" section. Look at the good sources. Compare it to the content of the websites/articles. I overly sourced at first, I admit. But much of it is already "common knowledge" on their respective articles and that he agrees is accurate himself. All the other sources in my last change is fine. I was told on my talk page I could keep the info and his should be removed, but I know if I do it then there will be hell to pay without me given a chance to explain my actions. It seems easier to just silence/block someone than work it out. I told him About.com was bad before that forum began. You can just look at it and tell. He was using the same argument with me about sources he didn't like, yet wants to keep About.com? Made no sense. Then he admits that other statements aren't sourced or that he has books with some of the info. When is that okay? And the noticeboard topic is resolved but not archived. But it shouldn't take days to get it removed. It is just a case of an IP user being scolded and blocked but other users getting to do as they wish even when it contradicts Wikipedia. Then when I use certian innocent words, I'm told I'm "insulting". Those are just observations and facts (feelings about the process such as "inept" which aren't directed to a specific person or left on their page). They are 'lies' that I referenced on my own talk page for my own personal records and I was blocked for (all distractions from the real issue that is going ignored). Very disappointing that this type of behavior exists here. Anyways, why can't someone just remove it? Seems everyone is scared of Walter. I don't get it... Have a nice evening! :) 99.129.112.89 (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S. The Walter user's problem with most of those was that [he] couldn't see any text about the content I included on the article. He said they only listed books and albums. Those were just confirmations that the artist/songs existed or he had to scroll down further or click the appropriate section the info was on. Those usually get removed from the article once they have been confirmed I've experienced in the past. I didn't assume they all would be used, only the reliable ones. But, he just dismissed it all which was not proper. Those cites don't actually need to be provided as they are already proven on the respective articles about the singers linked to. It was all a waste of time and a misunderstanding I guess. I feel he was "trigger happy" with the reverts and didn't actually take time (as with his supporters) to analyze my intentions better. I was judged as an IP user plain and simple. I was playing devil's advocate I guess. It was me telling him to remain professional and not make it personal at first. His mission was to just keep what he wanted and remove what he didn't. And it's not only my contributions he wanted to keep off what he must think is his article, it's a long history of this happening with others too I've come to find out. Now how come I can't type what I observe without being accused of insulting, while users with "wiki powers" (as he calls it) and admin can make all sorts of rude comments as they wish on their warning/blocking pages where they get together and praise each other (high fives) or belittle the new editors or IP users generally? I guess they just thought I'd suck it up and take what they dished out, but I had a point to prove and one editor "listened" today which I appreciated since he put everyone in their place and backed me up. And the words I listed on my own talk page were observations and articles I wanted to work on. They have not been nor can be directly linked to the Walter user personally. Just major contradictions in general which leaves a bad impression on those wanting to do honest work here. Just saying... So anyways, all of that to say: what happens if the page is not updated to reflect proper sources or isn't removed and if I post my contributions back then it starts problems again? I can list each sentence I posted with reliable sources and content from other articles that match it for someone who will read/focus. Not someone in a hurry who just reverts it without looking at the big picture. No one cared to let me do that though, the process was aborted by hearsay or tales about insults and edit wars that I did not create. (Thanks, and sorry this is so long.) 99.129.112.89 (talk) 02:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Update: The fixes have been and/or are being made now. I have yet to replace my contributions to the article but will eventually, hopefully without incident. Thanks, take care! P.S. I expect to take a long break from using this IP address and visiting the CCM-related sites all together, as I had planned to do before fighting to resolve all of this as a matter of principal. 99.129.112.89 (talk) 08:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the update. I've been away for two days, so couldn't reply any sooner. De728631 (talk) 16:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

You might like to look at...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Non-English_language_articles_-_reconsider_their_fortnight.27s_free_pass.3F Peridon (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I've just returned from a weekend's absence and I think all that I would have had to say has already been said. Currently it doesn't seem to me that there's much support of reconsidering the 14-days-rule, even more so since the OP has now learned about our modus operandi. De728631 (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:British rail transport magazines

Category:British rail transport magazines, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:American rail transport magazines

Category:American rail transport magazines, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

ABBA vandal - Coin945's thanks

Thankyou so much for sorting all that out. I was on holiday and only had my phone (and about a 15 minute window before i had to go somewhere) to explain the problem and try to get it fixed. My efforts failed miserably (editing on my samsung galaxy is a real bitch), so I give my total thanks to you for sorting it all out. You're a true gem. :D--Coin945 (talk) 09:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, you're welcome. :) De728631 (talk) 20:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Bavarian TV Awards

No, I didn't the titles. I just noticed that from 2002 and down, there appears to be some translation needed. Obviously, "fur" is "for", but I mean the entries like "Peter Dudzik für die Berichterstattung aus dem Nahen Osten (BR/ARD)"... well, it's not obvious what that means. --Geniac (talk) 21:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Pebe Sebert

Hi De728631. You recently deleted Portal:Pebe Sebert and I just wanted to note that two pages dependent on that one should also be deleted: Portal:Pebe Sebert/Intro and Portal:Pebe Sebert/Selected Article. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 15:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out, I really missed those pages. De728631 (talk) 15:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Brahman

Hi De728631. Could you have a look at this? Talk:Brahman#Lead #2.
81.107.150.246's contributions stop [2] where 81.106.127.14's contributions begin [3]. This is backed by 81's remarks on his editing history:

diff "who have edited this article over the last few years"
diff "I have been editing wikipedia for eight years".

Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

They're both part of a range of dynamic IPs so it seems obvious that it is in fact the same editor. This is not something problematic in itself. If other, related IPs should pop up though displaying the same behaviour we might look into the possibility of a range block. Other than that I suggest you keep discussing the content issues like you've done at the article talk pages. De728631 (talk) 09:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I will, thanks. It's good to know that I'm not alone in this. It's very tiresome. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Matej1234

The user was notified - diff at ANI. Regards, Giant Snowman 14:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Roza Bal

Thanks for letting me know. Giant Snowman 19:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Louis XIV

Re your "edit war" note on my Talk page, please see my request at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Blaue_Max#Strasbourg — Thanks. Sca (talk) 16:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

As you suggested, I moved my comment to Talk:Louis XIV of France. However, I note that "(German: Strassburg") has once again been removed from the article text — I assume, by User:Blaue Max. I don't think this should be done unless agreement is reached that it should be removed. The German origin and medieval history of Alsace and its primary city are known and accepted everywhere. In 1681, the city was known to its inhabitants as Strassburg (or Straßburg). Sca (talk) 16:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I have removed it from the article because its addition was contested by Blaue Max. Generally, if an edit is repeatedly removed from an article, the person who first introduced the new content is required to present proof that it benefits the article. So, if you would like to restore it, it is you who needs to convince the others that having "Strassburg" in the article is useful. Your talk page discussion is a first step, so let's see how this develops. De728631 (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I think I've made my argument at Talk:Louis XIV of France. I think it only fair for readers to realize that the city was of German origin. I don't particularly want to broaden the discussion into one airing centuries of French encroachment on the western edges of the Empire, since the article in question merely deals with Louis XIV, and before I got involved it already mentioned his annexation of Strassburg / Strasbourg. (Of course, I realize that now, three-plus centuries later, it's basically a francophone city with a frenchified German name.) Sca (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

JakeInJoisey

As he is now topic banned, should the links to John Kerry articles be removed from his talk page? Lukeno94 (talk) 19:24, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we need to remove them. He's been banned from editing Kerry-related pages but that doesn't mean that he's not allowed to read them. And it's still his "own" talk page. De728631 (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I know he's not banned from reading them, I just wasn't sure if it would be appropriate for him to keep those links. Lukeno94 (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

User:TheShadowCrow requesting unblock

TheShadowCrow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

See User talk:TheShadowCrow, where he has filled in an AE appeal template. Since the AE block that you placed in October 2012 has expired, this may not be the correct step. Probably his case should be handled as an ordinary unblock request. Elockid blocked him 3 months on 17 December 2012 for abuse of multiple accounts. Since his unblock requests are offering justification for his AA edits, you might be the best person to evaluate that. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Ongoing RfC - disposition in light of topic ban

Please advise as to the disposition of this RfC and to its intended closure by an uninvolved administrator. Thank you. JakeInJoisey (talk) 04:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Adding to the Blacklist

I've logged adiondistics.altervista.org that you added to the blacklist. Logging a request is essential for future reference. If there are requests in the future for removal of this URL and no log is found, it will be removed without having know why it was added. See MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/log#Logging_entries_on_the_blacklist. Cheers--Hu12 (talk) 16:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, alright. Thanks a lot for the reminder. I wasn't even aware this log existed. De728631 (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Further detail requested

Could I ask for further details on this discussion being closed as "no consensus"? By my count, there were ultimately seven users in favour of deletion or listifying—including the category creator, who agreed that the category should be deleted. There was one user in favour of a straight-up "keep" and one in favour of "keep but make hidden". I know that vote counting is not governing or determinative, but I have a hard time seeing how a 7–2 !vote can result in "no consensus". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 20:42, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

It is the strength of the arguments that determines the outcome of a discussion. Most people !voting for deletion simply repeated that this was overcategorisation without bringing new input why the category should go, but IMO that argument had already been countered by the "keep" faction. On the other hand, there were no convincing statements to result in a clear "keep" sitauation either. Renaming was unpopular too, so that's why I couldn't see any consensus. De728631 (talk) 20:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, we did have the guideline on our side, which is more than the other had. Perhaps those voting for deletion took for granted that they didn't have to repeat the guideline since it was stated in the nomination itself. Guideline + 7–2 + creator agrees on deletion. Given those three, I can't see how a "no consensus" can be the result. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The guideline refers to "Unrelated subjects with shared names" but I don't see how the subjects of the category are truly unrelated. One could even argue that there's only a finite number of known minerals and of these only another subset has been named after people. As I said, when I closed the CfD I couldn't see any convincing arguments for deletion. Please feel free to send this to deletion review if you feel really strongly about it. I won't mind. De728631 (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll put this on my list to renominate. I think results-wise, it is a bit of an outlier, since categorizing things by aspects of the things' names is pretty widely regarded as being non-defining. Thanks for the further information. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Topic Ban Due Process?

Inre your recent issuance of a topic ban, am I not entitled under Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Special enforcement log to at least be advised "what parts of WP:BLP were violated" and "which edits were in violation of policy"? Please note that my first response to the ANI initiating editor was for the specifics of the alleged WP:BLP violation(s) and received no response. A second request attempting to ascertain some specificity on my alleged violation was again afforded no response. How can any editor be reasonably expected to respond to allegations such as these when the specifics of the alleged violation(s) are not clearly delineated? JakeInJoisey (talk) 05:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Although your topic ban has been logged at the special enforcements site, it is in fact not a special arbitration enforcement measure applied on the discretion of a single administrator, but it has been decided by the community of editors in a regular public discussion. So the special requirements for BLPSE don't apply here. Moreover it has been pointed out to you in the ANI discussion, in various threads at your user talk page and the related deletion discussions that your reception of Kerry is problematic and possibly unencyclopedic. The ANI thread had been running for three days, and people have observed a certain "WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality with regards to this subject [John Kerry]" in your edits and attitude. That alone would've justified discretionary sanctions per BLPSE but now you have been put on a topic ban by regular means. You may of course appeal this topic ban at WP:AN or at requests for arbitration, but maybe you should just concentrate on another, less contentious topic to edit. De728631 (talk) 13:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Admin excursion
I have in fact just added the topic ban to the Editing restrictions page, as I thought that was where it went.[4] Feel free to revert if you think it shouldn't be there, De728631. Bishonen \| talk 15:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC). That's totally ok with me. Thank you for adding it there. De728631 (talk) 15:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

As I am now attempting to sort out and fully comprehend the specifics of this topic ban, please consider refactoring the 2 prior and unrelated administrative housekeeping considerations? I can't imagine that refactoring should be problematical and, if not, I will delete this request when those considerations are refactored into their own dedicated space. Thank you for your consideration. JakeInJoisey (talk) 16:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Please be a bit more specific. Which "prior and unrelated administrative housekeeping considerations" are you talking about? The specifics of your topic ban are as I stated them on your user talk page. De728631 (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Please be a bit more specific.

I initiated this inquiry, in this specific section, so as to inquire and fully inform myself as to the Wikipedia process upon which this topic ban was issued, not as a catch-all for administrative dialogue unrelated to that purpose. As I am still in the process of absorbing all this, it is plausible that I will have further inquiries of you in pursuit of that goal. I don't believe it is untoward of me to request that the integrity of this conversation be respected. JakeInJoisey (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I have collapsed these messages. But back on topic, i.e. your topic ban: to sum it up, the specifications of your topic ban have been set out in my initial message to your talk page, and have also been logged here. And in this case, the BLPSE page serves only as an additional registry. What this means for you can be summed up pretty easily: just don't edit anything that touches on the subject of John Kerry. Failures to do so may get you blocked from editing. You may, however, appeal these decisions at the administrator's noticeboard or at requests for arbitration. That is the essence of your new community-placed restrictions. De728631 (talk) 17:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration and response to my request. With your kind indulgence, I would still prefer to keep extraneous dialogue within, at least, the hatted boundary you have courteously established. May I refactor all this extraneous dialogue within that umbrella? And If you don't agree with the equity of my refactoring, simply edit as you see fit or revert in its entirety? JakeInJoisey (talk) 17:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Please do not refactor anything on my talk that you haven't written yourself. I wish to keep this thread as it is now. Do you have any further questions regarding your topic ban? De728631 (talk) 17:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Just for the record, I had no intent whatsoever to refactor your comments following "i.e. your topic ban...", just those unrelated to the topic. Be that as it may,...

Do you have any further questions regarding your topic ban?

It's certainly plausible. I need, as I said, to spend some time considering all this. I'm not confident, at this point, that attempting to defend the mandates of WP:NPOV as to 'he who shall not be named" isn't an exercise in futility. JakeInJoisey (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

After reviewing the related community dialogues inre this subject ([5][6][7]), I see allusions to BLP content not in compliance with WP:BLP but I am unable to ascertain which content that is. In my initial query to you here, I noted that, despite my request for provision of the specifics of the alleged violation, the ANI OP was unwilling to provide them...neither within the ANI itself when requested nor in this space where he was advised of this dialogue. In your response to me here, you did not address that same lack of provision. I believe you may be acting under the assumption (perhaps understandably) that this alleged WP:BLP violation has been the subject of a community review. It has not. It is this alleged violation of WP:BLP that must first be examined to establish the predicate for this topic ban under WP:BLP or WP:BLPSE...and disputing that allegation is my intent. I believe I can legitimately and effectively make that case under WP:BLP and WP:NPOV and will do so within the WP:BLPN venue with or without the provision of specifics, perhaps even more effectively without. I will, however, await your further consideration before pursuing this and would like to be advised as to how this topic ban impacts my ability to defend myself in this punitive action which strikes at the heart of WP:NPOV. JakeInJoisey (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Honestly, I think you know very well about the BLP-related flaws of your editing concerning Kerry. E.g. this kind of rhetoric of yours was not redacted without a need, and the copies of previously deleted articles in your userspace are proof that it is you who seems to have a problem with NPOV. Not to mention the extensive discussion on your user talk page. Moreover, your frequent appearances at WP:ANI over BLP issues [8][9] and forumshopping [10] is cleary seen as disruptive, as has been mentioned in the topic ban thread. I have already counselled you how to appeal the ban, and that's all I can say about it. Please move on and try to find another area of interest to edit. De728631 (talk) 14:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

That you would now characterize my prior participations in WP venues that are an integral and recommended part of the WP dispute resolution process as evidencing something other than a principled assertion of WP:NPOV, particularly as they relate to highly contentious articles such as these, and that the most recent ANI I initiated in response to criticisms of my prior editing which are now deemed not to be "personal attacks" but "forumshopping", is noteworthy. Simply add my name to the now lengthy list of editors who won't go near these articles with a ten foot editing pen, my voice by mandate, most others by choice. Thank you for your consideration. JakeInJoisey (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: Balun and associated blacklist

I have a filter setup currently as the editor is tweaking the link itself (Edit Filter 533). - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 09:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

That looks good, so let's see how it works. Thank you for staying alert in this case. De728631 (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

For some reason [a-zA-Z] wasn't working in the filter, so I scaled back the filter. Please help with that filter if necessary. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 17:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I'd say we do some more test runs with the filter. I've semi-protected Balun for a few days, so the IP won't bother us there. De728631 (talk) 21:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The filter currently only works on a specific set of pages (details purposely not public, but you should be able to find it), so it won't trip. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 03:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Your userboxen

I like the fact that you put a userbox containing a flag of my home state on your user page! Thanks, Bwrs (talk) 06:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure, but the credits go to User:Scepia who created that box. De728631 (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Maxlewisuk

Hi De728631. I'm considering unblocking this user, since it's pretty clear that he wasn't technically vandalising Wikipedia (which was the reason for the block). He does have a severe COI, so I'd be basing any unblock on the condition that he does not make direct article edits to pages he's conflicted over - beyond that, I reckon we could let him back into the fold. What are your thoughts? Yunshui 雲‍水 11:48, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, repeated unexlained blanking of large text parts like this is in fact a type of Vandalism. This has also been the reasoning by UltraexactZZ who declined the first unblock request. And in light of the self-admitted COI ("I was asked to make some amendments to the page by Steve's manager Sarah...") I would only unblock Maxlewisuk under the provision that he refrains from editing the Steve Robson article. He may provide suggestion, and most of all RS, at the article talk, but I wouldn't like to see him editing the page directly unless his contributions are 100% neutral and well-sourced. De728631 (talk) 14:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, the old admin koan... if a vandal blanks a section in the woods, does it make a sound? So you're happy with the idea of an unblock with a restriction on direct article edits, then? Yunshui 雲‍水 15:03, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that works for me. Maxlewisuk also wrote in his second unblock rationale that he won't edit the article if he was told so. Let's give him another chance. De728631 (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll go do it now. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:10, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Declined speedy

You declined the speedy deletion request on Henry Charles Heffer based on the appearance of the artist's painting on the BBC Your Paintings site. You must realize that this site indexes over 38,000 artists. I don't know what their criteria for inclusion are, but they are clearly looser than Wikipedia's. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:36, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

That's true, but speedy deletion is based on significance, not notability. And the article states that some paintings are held by the Croydon's Museum Art Collection, so that is a sign of significance IMHO. Please feel free to prod or AfD the article if you still think it should go. De728631 (talk) 16:40, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

clan of xymox

Hi there, clan of xymox is actually a Dutch band so I undid your deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.188.116.3 (talk) 04:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I know that they're Dutch but the article has also been sorted into Category:Dutch New Wave musical groups which is part of Category:Dutch musical groups. When there are more specific categories like "New Wave musical groups" we don't use the parent categories on the article page. So I've removed that one again. De728631 (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk)

I thank you De728631 for looking into the entire episode and being so rational about it. I will pursue this once unblocked through the channels you have advised. Though I understand your reason for reverting the edit on the Chess article again even though the History of Chess starts Chess of as Indian origin. I understand consensus will have to be found to include this brief fact in the introduction, somewhere in there. I just feel, you agree as an Adminstrator and I agree and most others Wikipedians do also about having that in the introduction that it should not have been so contested by (talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by HACKER HEADSHOT (talk • contribs) 20:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, De728631. You have new messages at Andrewman327's talk page.
Message added 23:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andrew³²⁷ 23:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey De728631; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Oliver. Good luck with that. De728631 (talk) 22:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vonbluvens Show logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Vonbluvens Show logo.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 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of 2013 Berlin helicopter crash for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2013 Berlin helicopter crash 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/2013 Berlin helicopter crash 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. ...William 20:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet templates

Hi! A few days ago you asked User:Reaper Eternal about those Sockpuppet templates, a few hours before I could (now archived). You may want to see this: Template talk:Sockpuppet#Image used in template. Cheers, theFace 11:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Netherlands 2 1-2 cents 1941 reverse.jpg

Images like this need two licences: a photo licence and a coin licence. Normally, this is handled by using {{Photo of art}}. You can't remove the photo licence because that violates the photographer's copyright. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course you're right, I totally forgot about those. Thank you for fixing it. De728631 (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Frank20041

Hi De. I've declined one unblock request from this user, but on re-reviewing the case I think we may both have been overly hasty; his edits have nothing in common with either Voidz (whose vanspamcruftisement he's actually trying to fix) or Papisjap. Unless you've a particularly major objection or some evidence I'm not party to, I believe an unblock is warranted here - happy to do so once I get your go-ahead. Yunshui 雲‍水 20:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

After consindering the latest arguments I've unblocked him myself. Thanks for your input. De728631 (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. Yunshui 雲‍水 20:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I also have unblocked Justinjohnsononline for the time being, but then it occured to me that the username is a bad idea per our policy. I've left them a note about changing the account name, but please feel free to reblock. De728631 (talk) 21:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

German translation

Hello. I was on Wikipedia:Translators available and notice that you were on the list for German to English translators and wondered if you could translate de:Louis Philippe Marie Léopold d’Orléans, prince de Condé to Louis d'Orléans, Prince of Condé? Thank you.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that looks quite interesting, so I'm going to put it on my to-do-list. I'm wondering though why he's not listed in Princes of Condé. De728631 (talk) 18:42, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi De. Sorry about Louis d'Orléans, Prince of Condé - it's happened to me before, so I know how frustrating it is! --Bermicourt (talk) 06:45, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

BTW... nice follow-up work. Is it worth running for a WP:DYK? --Bermicourt (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. I'm going to nominate it. De728631 (talk) 13:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Ship engine room ventilation system

Back in 2011 you PRODded this and I deleted it. The author has now complained on my talk page, so I have restored it as a contested PROD and am letting you know so that you can consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Louis d'Orléans, Prince of Condé

On 25 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Louis d'Orléans, Prince of Condé, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that French nobleman Louis Philippe Marie Léopold d'Orléans (1845–1866) was not only the last Prince of Condé but also the first royal visitor to the continent of Australia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Louis d'Orléans, Prince of Condé. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Upload of "The Hobbit" advertisement

Hi De,

You deleted the recent upload that I made of the publisher's description of "The Hobbit" taken from the publisher's advertising catalog of 1937. Could you point me in a direction that I could go to obtain permission to upload that 1937 catalog? The publisher, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., no longer exists, its assets having been sold a number of times. How does one trace down the copyright holder of an advertising catalog that announced new books to be published?

Vergilius1956 (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

HarperCollins might be the address of choice since they're at the end of the chain of sales Allen & Unwin experienced, and they're obviously continuing the various Middle-earth books. But I doubt that they would release their material under a free license since that would have to include commercial re-use. Ultimately I think we can continue very well without the advertisement in the Hobbit article, but please feel free to give it a try. De728631 (talk) 20:49, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

"TV Series" socks

FYI: User talk:NawlinWiki#"TV Series" socks. JohnCD (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

J. R. R. Tolkien

In general articles should not be removed from categories because the eponymous category is in that category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems rather that in general this should be decided by consensus for each article. I've left a comment at the article talk page. De728631 (talk) 01:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Arjun Sarja

As you aware of the huge sock farm on this article, could you please semi this for a while? — Abhishek ^Talk 15:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I even found another sock there that had managed to stay below the radar. Semi'ed for 2 weeks. De728631 (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

2012–13 Wycombe Boys AFC season

THis is vandalism. If you look at the content of the article, it is copied from the Premier League page, and contains goals and results of the big boy adult pro footballers such as Peter Crouch intermingled with named such as "Little Pea" "Robbo" and other footballers with their names modified (so Michael Carrick becomes James Carrick for example). Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Salt please as well. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

IMO you're a bit too fast to judge this. As far as I can tell from the edit histories Weareunited878 was trying to modify the existing tables with results from the youth club. I've now given them instructions about notability and Articles for Creation and told them they'll be blocked for recreating any such pages in the live article space. De728631 (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Hiking in Kosovo

Hello De728631. You have recently edited Hiking in Kosovo so you must be familiar with the dispute about the geographic names. Though sock edits shouldn't be allowed to stand, it seems to me that piped place names are just an invitation for future warring. Do you have any ideas for how to nudge the participants in these articles towards one or more requested moves, to get the article names sorted out in accordance with WP:Naming conventions (geographic names)? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Ed, thank you for bringing this up. I've been thinking quite a lot about this matter, and it seems to me that Bobrayner is already actively edit warring about placenames in Kosovo. See also the section "WP:AT" at his user talk page. I agree with you that the piped names are a troublesome alternative, but nevertheless I felt the need to remove the socked edits at Hiking in Kosovo. I've found various old discussion about Kosovo placenames, see [11] and there's even a Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Kosovo-related articles. It says that where no proper English name is available, "then the non-English name most commonly used in English-language sources" shall be used. "In practice, this will mean that Serbian geographical names will take precedence (e.g. Ibar River, Šar Mountains)." I'm going to revert the name changes at Hiking in Kosovo to the unpiped versions with an additional remark at the talk page. And I'm seriously contemplating an arbitration enforcement sanctions against Bobrayner if he continues down that road. A temporary topic ban on placenames concerning Kosovo might be needed. De728631 (talk) 15:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

User rights

Hi De728631, this is probably a stupid question, but I was wondering why you granted yourself reviewer and rollbacker when these come with the admin bit? Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Heh. Recently when I was watching an edit history I thought those specific rights got lost somehow because I couldn't find the rollback button. But then I noticed that that was an error on my side. I might as well remove the extra ticks on my user rights list. De728631 (talk) 14:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Church of San Anton

Good afternoon,

I started editing the article "Church of San Anton" and you have delete my writing.Can you say me why,please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iraide.gelado (talk • contribs) 15:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at your user talkpage where I left you a note awhile ago. That's also why you're seeing a litte orange bar at the upper edge of your browser window that reads "you've got new messages". De728631 (talk) 15:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Contrib-ar1

It causes some errors so. However, this is the Arabic text

يُرجى عدم المساهمة باللغة العربية في هذه النسخة من ويكيبيديا، مساهماتكم باللغة العربية أكثر من مرحب بها في النسخة العربية من ويكيبيديا

Please add it if you can — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuwaity26 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

1remains Uploads: Nick Blackburn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Blackburn

I uploaded a picture from Flickr, it owns a license and I put the author's name in it, is this image okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1remains (talk • contribs) 17:50, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

No, that's not ok because the page at Flickr says "© All rights reserved". So that image is not free to use. Every image on Flickr that has a © symbol can't be hosted at Commons. And we don't accept non-free images of living people at Wikipedia either. You'll to have to look for the Creative Commons license at Flickr. Watch out for the following icons:

or

Anything with a non-commercial license is not ok either. That is indicated by the crossed dollar sign:

. De728631 (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Church of San Anton

Please don´t put bad things of our article that are not true because you can find on it a lot of references and is not an oppinion essay because the article is based on an academic work done by us and our references.If you continue putting wrong things I must talk with Wikipedia to ban your user.Please stop disturbing our work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoeangulo (talk • contribs) 16:25, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess you're referring to this edit. Obviously you don't know yet how Wikipedia works. Please read or guidelines and policies about conflicts of interest, reliable sources and "ownership" of articles. And what is even more important: we don't publish original research, even if it is well referenced.

That aside, putting maintenance template on an article is not at all a bad thing and nobody will get banned for it. It is actually a standard procedure of encouraging other editors to improve an article and you should not remove such tags without addressing the issue.

I appreciate your work with this article but you shouldn't be overly protective of it. You don't own this article because everyone is allowed to edit articles at Wikipedia. And such edits have to comply with our set of policies that have been established by consensus. So please keep up the good work but do it Wikipedia style. De728631 (talk) 20:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

RE: Talk:Timbaland production discography

I have included my response via the article's talk page just as you directed me to. Thanks. WillieLimpD (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Another response has been added to the talk page. WillieLimpD (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'm watching that page. You don't need to keep me informed about new postings. De728631 (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

CSD G4

Saw your delete of Bilal Khan per my CSD. You may wish to salt, as the article has been repeatedly recreated in various forms by socks. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Done, see Drmies' page. De728631 (talk) 15:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of symphonic metal bands 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, De728631. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Faizan.
Message added 00:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gaijin42 (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sxu02msg

Hi, re: this, was Sxu02msg the master then? The CU results didn't mention them... Giant Snowman 19:50, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

CU said that this account was inconclusive. But because of their edit behaviour I'm sure that Sxu02msg is the master. Note how they all forgot to sign their text at the AFD page. De728631 (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I thought that as well - hence why I started the SPI - thanks for the clarification. Giant Snowman 20:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Duty-bound

Hey, De728631, I've received an email from User:DanielTom (he has my Wikipedia email address), who is asking to have his talk page access restored (just talk page access) in order to address the allegations of email abuse on-wiki. He promises that there won't be any names named or anything in the post; he says it will be similar to his goodbye message, so I'll let you be the judge of that. To be quite honest, I'm getting pretty tired of the whole situation, but I figured that I should at least ask you, as the admin who removed it from him. Cheers, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

His so-called goodbye message contained already a rant about abusive admins and the like. And I'm having a hard time believing that he'll stay on topic this time. De728631 (talk) 13:41, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

sorry

I didn't saw the code "en" before creating . eventough i recreated it on tamil wikipedia . I don't know howto delete it in english. Rohit gay 13:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Amandil

You are quite right that a link to a redirect to Arnor is not required here. Recently, another editor moved Arnor to Arnor (Middle-earth) to create a disambiguation page. I reversed that move (and moved the disambiguation page to Arnor (disambiguation)), but I am concerned that the title may again become a disambiguation page in the future. bd2412 T 15:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Per Wikipedia:Disambiguation, the primary topic in English language use is Tolkien's Arnor, not some Nordic names or the Galactic Civilizations race. So the current naming seems about right. De728631 (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

SPI

Since you had interaction related to one of the socks named here, I thought I'd bring your attention to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DanielTom. Toddst1 (talk) 20:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

rg. vandalism

hello DE728632:

there is a troll named "WillieLimpD" who constantly deletes content on the "timbaland production discography" page without reasonable justification. could please indefinitely hinder him from vandalizing this page?

sincerely, a concerned user — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.176.239.113 (talk) 18:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

There is already a discussion going on at Talk:Timbaland production discography. These edits seem to be justified and they're not vandalism as far as I can see. Please join the discussion to explain why that content should stay in the article. De728631 (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I spent hours to create this section in order to educate the public of all singles produced or co-produced by timbaland because such thorough work doesn't exist. I think it's unfair that some troll is allowed to destroy one's hard work with one click while nothing is done by admin to prevent such vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.138.3.247 (talk) 19:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Please stop calling WillieLimpD a troll. I understand that I may be frustrating to see your work undone but sometimes less is more when it comes to creating Wikipedia articles; and we've got some quite strict policies when it comes to name calling and such. Instead of making wrong claims of vandalism, please talk to WillieLimpD at the article talk page. He's made his point over there for removing the section, so now it's your turn to explain to him and other editors why that part of the article is useful. De728631 (talk) 22:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hans Kung pic

Dear De728631, the website of the Global Ethics Istitute in Germany permits this pic to be copied, and it does not indicate a copyright. Thanks for your help! Augustinestudent (talk) 21:58, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you please provide a direct link to the site where they give a permission for copying the image? So far, the image page has only a link to the IGE in the United States, and that website has a notice "©2012 Collegium Augustinianum" at the bottom. Also, a mere permission for copying the file is not enough to upload files to Wikimedia Commons. Files at Commons must have been released under a free license that allows anyone to reuse them for any purpose including commercial redistribution. And this license must have been given by the original photographer, not by an institute that is possibly only just another reuser of the photograph. De728631 (talk) 22:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Judd Lander article

Hi there Recently began writing an article on an old friend of mine, Judd Lander. I have now seen your feedback on the article. Your words were:

Before turning this into a live article, please note that the current version does not credibly point out the subject's notability. Wikipedia articles need sources that are not affiliated with the subject, so statements from music magazines or repeated coverage in the national or international news would be a good start to improve the article.

Now I am having trouble finding any newspaper clippings on him, despite being active and well-known in the music industry for many many years - could you provide any tips? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amy Collins21 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Jeremy Spencer

Thanks, that's why I've stopped. He's on 3 reverts already and arguably I'm on 2. I've never been an edit-warrior, and after he abused me on his talk page, I just went to ANI. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

What am I supposed to do now that you've closed the ANI report? I have precisely zero option but to leave it at his crappy preferred version. He's made one personal attack against me already and patently will not budge. It is not a content dispute. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, I appreciate that. Thanks, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was confused about the CongerEelSolo thing. The IP has reverted again, by the way, for the 4th time today. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

This guy didn't waste any time after his block expired [12]. He posted on the talk page, but I can tell you now there's no point in discussing anything with him. Bretonbanquet (talk) 08:05, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

This is getting silly, but I've blocked that IP again. De728631 (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely. Thanks for the prompt attention, cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't like to bring this up again, but this editor has continued on his single-issue crusade since his block expired, including a pointy edit at Jeremy Spencer [13] and a mini edit-war at Python (programming language) [14]. There is also a personal attack on me here [15] and a personal attack on you here [16]. He was warned for the attack on me, incidentally. This guy has no place on an encyclopedia, and I would suggest (at the least) keeping an eye on him. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Reported at WP:AIV. I'm tired of this guy so let's see what my fellow admins think about this situation. De728631 (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Moved to ANI. De728631 (talk) 19:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

This guy has returned with a new IP already [17]. I've asked for semi-protection at Jeremy Spencer, but the IP will need to be blocked as a sock. Bretonbanquet (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

What are you doing?

Dude why did you delete those eagle covers? I uploaded better versions. Koala15 (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah but i had a file at 300 x 300 and you reverted back to 200 x 200 which clearly is not the guidelines. Koala15 (talk) 22:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks i appreciate it. Koala15 (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

German translation

Hello. I was on Wikipedia:Translators available and notice that you were on the list for German to English translators and wondered if you could translate content from de:Ludwig Gaston von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha to Prince Ludwig Gaston of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 20:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually there's nothing essential in the German article that hasn't been mentioned yet in the English version. I have however added one obvious source from the German Wikipedia, but unfortunately I don't have access to the other sources mentioned there, so I don't know which events they're referring to. De728631 (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Having read your talk page I realised that Icarus of old already did the job. De728631 (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I asked you both at once. Thanks. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 03:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Translation from German

Hello, I saw your name on the German-to-English translators list. I wonder if you would be able to translate two paragraphs of an online news article from German to English. If you might be able to translate the entire article of nine (9) paragraphs, that would be great, but I understand if that's too much of a burden. If you can reply on my talk page, that would be fine. Otherwise, I'll look for a reply here on your talk page. If you can assist, I will provide the url of the article or the text, whichever is preferable. Thanks for any help. DonFB (talk) 08:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much for offering to translate some material. I definitely don't have any intention of adding two paragraphs of text to a Wikiped article directly copied from the source. I am very interested in being able to accurately understand and describe the content contained in the source (already footnoted in the article) if I decide to add some additional information from the source to the article. This brings up a question that I wanted to ask you, especially because as an administrator, you have a better understanding of the rules than I do. If you provide me with an English translation, am I permitted to use your translation as my "source" when writing text that I add to the article? The original online source (in German) would still be footnoted in the article as the actual source. I planned to add the descriptive text myself, probably with one or two brief quoted phrases in English, taken from the English translation (with an indication to the reader that the text is translated). I would not ask you to add the text--or would it be necessary for you to add the text, because you are the translator? The article is Gustave Whitehead. The source, in German, is -- http://www.focus.de/wissen/wissenschaft/erfinder-weisskopftaube-fliegt_aid_169297.html (currently cited in the article as footnote #58). I would like an accurate translation of the 7th and 8th paragraphs. The 7th para begins: "Trotz aller Sorgfalt..." The 8th para begins: "Auch die Verwendung..." If you might have time to translate all the paragraphs, I would be most grateful, but I understand that could be too time-consuming. Sorry for such a long message. Thank you very much. DonFB (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia:Verifiability#Citing_non-English_sources Yes, you can cite the english, but should also provide the original. "When quoting a non-English source (whether in the main text, in a footnote, or on the talk page), a translation into English should always accompany the quote. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations by Wikipedians, but translations by Wikipedians are preferred over machine translations. When using a machine translation of source material, editors should be reasonably certain that the translation is accurate and the source is appropriate. Editors should not use machine translations of non-English sources in contentious articles or biographies of living people. If needed, ask an editor who can to translate it for you.In articles, the original text is usually included with the translated text when translated by Wikipedians, and the translating editor is usually not cited. When quoting any material, whether in English or in some other language, be careful not to violate copyright"Gaijin42 (talk) 19:07, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

The problem here is that we can't quote entire paragraphs because that would exceed the limits of fair use. And for the same reason I can't translate the entire article for DonFB's private use either. But I'm going to quote a few key sentences though and will add a translation for them. De728631 (talk) 19:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for offering to help. If I may clarify my request: I do not intend to, nor will I, quote any paragraph from the German-language source in its entirety. I am only interested in knowing exactly what the paragraphs say, just as if they were English-language sources, so that I can be able to accurately summarize some information from the paragraphs in the Wikipedia article. DonFB (talk) 19:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I see your addition to the article, and it is very helpful. DonFB (talk) 19:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think I can also give you a summary of each paragraph here:

Introduction: a "cream-coloured crossbreed of a bathtub and a bat" rolls out on an airfield that is usually frequented by Luftwaffe aiplanes.
The maiden flight of "No. 21". The replica aircraft weighs 334 kg and could be made to fly a distance of 500 metres.
Hermann Betscher, chairman of an association that has been researching the work of Weisskopf for 25 years and has since been striving for the recognition of Weisskopf as the first motorplane pioneer, thinks that this flight is a reason to rewrite the history books.
They think the replica's ability of fly is proof that Weisskopf's original device "fulfilled the requirements for controlled flights."
Allegedly, Weisskopf performed the first flight in a motorplane on 14 August 1901 which was 2 years before the Wright Bros. Leading experts including staff of the Smithsonian Institution doubt this and lament the lack of detailed blueprints and other historical evidence. The only evidence is based on contemporary newsfeeds, e.g. from the Bridgeport Herald on 18 Aug. 1901, and on eyewitness reports that were made decades after the alleged flight.
The makers of the replica used images and descriptions for their work. The hull was covered by a custom-made silk fabric that was allegedly similar to the material Weisskopf used.
The director of the aerospace department at Deutsches Museum criticises that such a replica was not proof that the original did actually fly. The 1998 reproduction included modern research and materials such as fibre glass, and had a modern engine, too.
The replica also used modern engines instead of the obscure "acetylene engine" described by Weisskopf.
The author's conclusion: the dispute will continue whether Weisskopf made the first motor flight. Reportedly, a photo was published in several journals and magazines that showed Weisskopf's aparatus in flight. And also the two German encyclopediae Meyers Konversations-Lexikon and Brockhaus seem to have made up their mind. They describe Weisskopf as an "American aviation pioneer of German descent ... who conducted the world's first motor flight." [18] De728631 (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Precious

Frisia
Thank you for quality articles on Frisia, for taking care of pages needing translation, finding Denglish uncool, for handling the administrator function as a privilege, and for caring about people, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Andrewman327. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, NK Mladost Kikači, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Andrew³²⁷ 18:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, De728631. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Doleschallia bisaltide (Autumn Leaf) renom1.
Message added 14:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 14:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

File:JRR Tolkien Signature.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:JRR Tolkien Signature.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Lex Frisonium

Psst, that's a redirect you tagged the talkpage of; the target article has already been tagged :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 22:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I used |class=redirect to populate the new Category:Redirect-Class Frisia articles. :-) Having an overview about existing redirects can be helpful. De728631 (talk) 10:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Aaaah, ok :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 11:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

to save Quenya from the atrocities I am commiting against it

help...please... Double sharp (talk) 14:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Heh. I've left some ideas at your subpage. De728631 (talk) 17:00, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

YAYYYY I got Li right :-D :-D :-D. Now I can continue creating havoc. Double sharp (talk) 17:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Any ideas for what kind of chemical symbols they might use? Double sharp (talk) 11:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any ideas about that. Perhaps you could use the first syllable of each element written in tengwar. De728631 (talk) 13:42, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Would prefer first two syllables honestly (to really make sure there are no collisions).

(For equations, we can use Sarati to stand in for Greek letters...) Double sharp (talk) 13:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

So, I went crazy and did (almost) all of elements 11-54 on my subpage. Please...correct as you see fit...and offer suggestions better than mine. (I like your fluorine suggestion. It is rather long though, spanning eight(?) syllables!) In particular, I hope you have a non-crazy idea on how to deal with technetium's boring name... Double sharp (talk) 13:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

BTW: I'm terribly sorry for taking up your time like this (and spamming your talk page like this)...but I guess since you were the one who brought the Quenya article about GA, you ought to be much better in it than I am. :-) And I do need something to get my mind off VisualEditor. This will do nicely. Thanks a lot for your help, Double sharp (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, but please don't overrate my Quenya skills. All I know about it is how to use the proper text books. ;) De728631 (talk) 14:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Happy Adminship

Wishing De728631/2013 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! BenisonPBaby 13:35, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I never thought of this date. Thanks a lot! De728631 (talk) 14:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Reason for your disabling edit at List of country subdivisions by GDP over 100 billion US dollars?

Why did you make this edit? And then allow me to be blamed for eliminating the England data? Are you aware that GVA = GDP when talking about political subdivisions? AfricaTanz (talk) 22:38, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm not aware that GVA = GDP when applied to political subdivisions. Per our article on the gross regional domestic product, the latter is the aggregate of the regional GVA, but the GVA article shows a different equation: GVA + taxes on products - subsidies on products = GDP. So, are we listing a a true GDP including taxes, or the aggregate GVA? That's not clear to me, so let's better use sources that explicitely list the GDP. And until now I didn't know that you had been blamed for removing the England data. DerStatistiker was however obviously referring to this edit of yours which wasn't related to GVA either, but challenged the Eurostats list of regional GDPs. I have to admit I'm not happy with this Eurostats database either because it splits up England into a number of regions, and so you have to pick the GDP of every single region from Northumbria to North Yorkshire and sum them up – which I haven't tried yet. Not to mention the question about conversion from EUR to USD. De728631 (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I've now opened a discussion about this specific problem at the article talk page. De728631 (talk) 16:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

(you) removed images, why ?

I am new to the wiki and did some severe mistake in the (copyright) tagging of some visual files I uploaded. These errors were then corrected and the Copyright owner of these files (Bernardo Mario Kuczer) sent himself mails (twice) for each of the files to permissions-en@wikimedia.org attaching each of the contented files to each email again. (this happened I think already on the 13-8-2013).Yesterday you deleted (but only some of) the files from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilización_o_Barbarie (they are still on google search for images attributed to Bernardo Kuczer (or Bernardo Mario Kuczer), though). So: what is going wrong ? Is this a problem of synchronization with the permissions department ? What should be done? Upload the files anew ? I must say that today one file has been restituted. What next ? Thanks--Hammero (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

If any email is sent to the permissions team, either the uploader of the image or the copyright holder should tag the file pages with a template {{OTRS pending}} to indicate that the permission mail has been sent. Neither of those images I deleted were marked in that way. and the permissions team is made up of volunteers (as all Wikipedia staff) which may cause some delays; so it wasn't clear that Mr Kuczer agreed to publishing them under a free license. With this new information, I am, however, going to undelete these files, but the final decision about the validity of the license lies with the people of the OTRS team. De728631 (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Deleteing

why u dont delete "Anti Blocking Users"? i blocked without reason , logical reason , in wikifa. Sonia Sevilla (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll leave the deletion to others. Since I already nominated your other recent contributions regarding the Farsi Wikipedia I felt a bit WP:INVOLVED. If you got blocked over there, that's no reason to go on a crusade against them here, least you'd like to be blocked here as well. De728631 (talk) 19:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

no. i dont want blocke here. blocking in killing.۝ ۝ (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

User:PathIlluminateDotCom

Thanks for deleting the page. I'm not sure how I missed that. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Welcome :) De728631 (talk) 21:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Quenya pronounciation question

How on earth are sy and cy (from Erucyermë? is this some Númenórean mispronunciation) (didn't the latter merge with ty early in Quenya linguistic history) supposed to be pronounced? Double sharp (talk) 15:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, and is hl [l̥] or [ɬ]? Double sharp (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

cy also found in Ecyanáro (= S. Eignor) (I'm normalizing k to c here) Double sharp (talk) 13:11, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Let me see. C is always pronounced like k, so it's EruKyermë and EKyanáro. The h in hl is represented by the 'halla' tengwa which used to be pronounced [χ] in Feanorian times, but was later used for an aspirated h. So it's not very clear. De728631 (talk) 16:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Is that a cluster [kj], or something like [kʲ] (which would be more consistent with how consonant clusters involving <y> seem to be treated in Quenya)?

Never heard before that halla was originally [χ]. I always thought <hl> and <hr> were voiceless <l> and <r> all the time. Is the latter some sort of Exilic thing? Can I have some refs?

Also, any other tengwar that were pronounced differently in Fëanorian times than Third Age, other than this, thúlë and ázë? (I ask because I am one of those Fëanorian/First Age Freak Silm fans.)

(on quenya phonology, where'd you find initial x and ps in Quenya? I must confess that I like the idea, but I can't think of any words that have that.) Double sharp (talk) 16:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Actually (off topic), has anyone mathematically calculated how much better Elven eyesight is than ours? How tall are the Crissaegrim (cf. Voronwë in "Of Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin"?) What does that translate to in terms of eyesight? We're told they have names for Luinil = Uranus and Nénar = Neptune; that must mean that they can see them with their naked eyes. Neptune's apparent magnitude is around 8.0. Again, calculations? Can they see the Galilean moons? What moons can they see? (Can someone calculate this, please? Pretty please???) Double sharp (talk) 16:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, Uranus can be seen as a "star", i.e. a tiny bright spot in the sky, by humans. So I guess the elven eyesight is not that much telescopic. De728631 (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Bortle Dark-sky Scale has upper limit of 8.0; Neptune can occasionally go below this. Only one guy seems to have tried. So I guess elven eyesight isn't that impressive. Just enough more impressive than Men's to impress us. Double sharp (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

observation

Ariadne – one of those names that translates straight to a canon Tolkien character (Anairë). Double sharp (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Any other names you know like that?? I don't think there are any more... Double sharp (talk) 16:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I have a feeling this is Tolkien running out of ideas :-) And IRL nobody wants Hair-shout or Master-shout as a name... Double sharp (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Malek Jandali

Hi! Thanks for stepping in so quickly at Malek Jandali. I should have noticed the copyright status of that external page. Just a thought: did you consider the possibility of sockpuppetry while looking at the history? It seems likely that Wikileekpediamonitor, Wikimangement and Wikinvestigae are all the same orthographically-challenged wiki-user. If you decided to look at that, you might perhaps consider whether Shamguy1982 (ash-Sham being a word for Syria) and perhaps also Jandalim might also be part of the group (as well as being obvious COI editors)? The history on ar.wp is also interesting. Wikiarabiata does not seem to have edited here, but the name seems just a little reminiscent of some who have. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I didn't pay attention to the usernames while cleaning that article, but did you consider WP:SPI? The names do look somewhat similar and if there's some orthographic pattern you might want to file an investigation. Contrary to the Guy Huygens list of "Frankies" I'm not so convinced here. De728631 (talk) 18:47, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

David Sneddon

Hi. I have recreated the talk page of David Sneddon (kidnap victim) that you deleted. I have noted, via a WSJ article, that the Japanese government now supports the claim he was kidnapped by North Korea. In contrast, the anonymous IP who nominated the page for SPD only offers no evidence to support his/her speculations. This page should at best go to AfD (perhaps under WP:BIO1E. It should not be speedily deleted on the basis of one user's unsupported speculations. Michitaro (talk) 14:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored the article, but also nominated it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Sneddon (kidnap victim). De728631 (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I am fine with that. Thanks. Michitaro (talk) 15:19, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

the Quenya consonant chart

What time period and dialect do we use? Double sharp (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

in which I devise an IPA transcription scheme for Quenya

<p>, <b>, and <m> can be transcribed as [p], [b], and [m]. <f> was described as originally being pronounced [ɸ]; thus it seems plausible that <v> was originally [β]. In Ñoldorin Quenya these moved to [f] and [v], while in Vanyarin [ɸ] could become [ʍ]. Logically [β] would have become [w], yet this seems not to have happened. The development of [ɸ] may have passed through [xʷ] before arriving at [ẘ] (= [ʍ]). (If [β] really did develop similarly to [w], then I might suggest an intermediate stage [ɣʷ].) (Yet whether the [ɸ] > [ʍ] shift happened throughout in Vanyarin Quenya is debatable. But how else do we explain huinë vs. Taur-nu-Fuin?) I would just transcribe it broadly as /p/, /b/, /m/, /f/, /v/.

<t> and <d> are dental, so we can transcribed them as [t̪] and [d̪] (the bridge diacritic can go if we don't really care about precision). Our consonant chart gives <n> as alveolar; what then to make of orthographic <nd>? Possibly [n] has a dental allophone [n̪] in this cluster. Broad transcription: /t/, /d/, /n/. <th> (or <þ>) is dental, not interdental as English [θ]. We could symbolize it as [θ̠], being retracted (Fauskanger describes it as being closer to [s]). But if it is a sibilant I would transcribe it as [s̪]. For a broad transcription /θ/ will certainly do.

<s> is just [s]. Milan Razec described <z> on his translation of the oath of Fëanor as basically being more like [ɹ̪̝] (voiced dental continuant? the diacritics!!! argh!), but this is a non-issue for phonemic transcription; it's just [z]. But that description makes the transition to [r] far more plausible. You mentioned that halla was initially [χ]; thus we have the development [χr] > [r̊], [χl] > *[l̥] > [ɬ]. In Third Age Quenya these would become just plain [r] and [l] (orthographic <r> and <l>). <ry> has to be a palatalized alveolar trill [rʲ] (as [r̠] - palatal trill - is, shall we say, highly implausible). <sy> could then be analyzed as [sʲ] = [ɕ]. This sound probably merged with <hy> [ç] later. The problematic sequence <cy> in Erucyermë and Ecyanáro could be an archaicized spelling (as primitive <kj> became <tj>) for <ty> = [c]. Originally it would have been [kʲ]. (But it's a small difference; Polish has [kʲ] and [gʲ], and these are sometimes transcribed as just plain [c] and [ɟ]).

Based on Tolkien's descriptions of <hy> (voiceless <y> [j̊] would tend towards frication anyway, like voiceless <l>, so [ç]) and <ty>, I think we can sort of assume that clusters with <y> are palatal consonants. Thus <ty> [c], <ny> [ɲ], <dy> [ɟ] (only known in the cluster <ndy> [ɲɟ]; the [ɟ] portion was lost in Ñoldorin Quenya), <ly> [ʎ], and <hy> [ç]. Of course <y> is [j]. Phonemically I suppose they are really /tj/, /nj/, etc., and that [c], [ɲ], etc. are just how these clusters are realised. I lean on being faithful to the pronunciation up to a point!

<g>, <c> (<k>), <ch> (<χ>, <h>; I'm simplifying) are [g], [k], [x]. <gh> (<ȝ>), from Rúmilian times, was deleted; it would have been [ɣ]). <ñ> is [ŋ] (initially became [n] in the Second Age?) Would claim the clusters with w as being realized as labialized consonants [gʷ], [kʷ], [xʷ] > [ʍ], [ŋʷ] in pronunciation and phonemically /gw/, /kw/, /xw/, /ŋw/. When [ŋ] became [n] in initial position /ŋw/ would have become /nw/ (also [nw] in speech, I suppose; [nʷ] would form a series by itself, and how they would hate that :-)) <w> is just [w]. <h> is just [h] (except in the combination <ht> where it could be [x] (e.g. mahta) or [ç] (e.g. rihta)).

Vowels: I like your transcription scheme. Very cool. For broad transcriptions, get rid of the [e]~[ɛ] and [o]~[ɔ] contrasts.

Sample text forthcoming. (probably the Oath of Fëanor in Razec's translation because I want to show off how I handle early Quenya. in broad and narrow transcriptions.) Double sharp (talk) 16:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Forthcoming: Primitive Elvish in IPA, Thindarin, mayyybe Telerin and Adûnaic Double sharp (talk) 16:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Please don't use any systems devised by yourself for our Wikipedia articles. If you add transcriptions to the Quenya article, please find a reliable reference for them. You said that you like my transcription scheme for vowels, but that was devised by one Mr. Gebhardt (Google book). And I've also restored the cited version of the table of consonants. Apart from that I agree that we should add something about number words (re your talk page comment). De728631 (talk) 18:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

This isn't really my stuff...it's basically me going through everyone's descriptions of Quenya sounds and writing them in IPA (how I wish they would use it).

Looks like the table now uses a basically phonemic analysis of Quenya. Great! Now it's far more consistent than when I first saw it! (and felt the urge to add stuff based on sources I can't remember, lol) Though I would argue that /ç/ need not be there (phonemically perhaps /hj/), if Tolkien describes it as ich-Laut, and doesn't describe all the other palatals clearly as palatals, I guess this is necessary.

(rages about how Tolkien's descriptions are so inconsistent: if you have <hy> = /ç/, why not have all the -y clusters be palatals...) Double sharp (talk) 01:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

So, as soon as I find all my sources for this stuff... Double sharp (talk) 03:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Debbe Magnusen Mk. 2.jpg

Hey there! I'm trying to review asserted permission for use of the above noted image. In order to expedite the authorization process, I am requesting temporary restoration of the file. I appreciate your help. Feel free to drop me a line if you have any questions. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 18:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Cindy. I've had a look into the latest version, and apparently it was some "Wikipedia only" license. That's why RHaworth deleted it. I've brought it back to life, so the file is yours. :) Please let me know when you're done. De728631 (talk) 19:05, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the temporary restoration. After reviewing the file, I'm going to recommend deletion. I've heard several different assertions of copyright ownership of this image, with the last assertion that the subject's friend took the photo with the subject's camera. However, the metadata asserts copyright by John Boone Photography. A bit disconcerting. Thanks for your help. Hope you have a great weekend! Cindy(talk) 19:49, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

And... zapped again. Have a great weekend, too. :) De728631 (talk) 19:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

can you point me to the policy

where "this article has existed for years" is a legitimate justification for keeping it? Thanks. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 16:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

While this is not policy cast in stone, it's common practice. The fact that an article has been edited and kept for years without challenging the significance shows that a rough consensus exists for not speedily deleting the page. So, "if in doubt, don't delete". There are other means for deletion than the "speedy" way, and if you feel an article should go, please prod it or use AfD. De728631 (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a common practice that makes, in my view, no sense. especially for articles without appreciable connections to other articles, the idea that "noone has challenged it = consensus" may simply reflect the fact that it doesnt get many views. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 23:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Did you also read the second part of my edit summary? In my opinion Yvan Arpa is at least marginally notable. Apart from that his many executive positions and a former appointment as a professor are a claim of significance that rules out CSD A7. Please don't forget that speedy deletion is about significance, not notability. That said, I won't mind if the page gets deleted either. De728631 (talk) 23:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

That makes a bit more sense. I've just encountered editors before who say things like "this edit has stood for 4 days and has 200 watchers, so it is clearly acceptable and represents consensus." and that makes me irritated. Admittedly, i have a kneejerk reaction to that sort of thinking, but i've also never heard it properly justified. I do wish there were some policy guidance there that i could point to, either for or against. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 23:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

absolutely nothing to do with WP

Because I saw the latest XKCD comic and felt a sudden urge to translate it into Quenya. Please correct my atrocities against the language. Thank you! Double sharp (talk) 09:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

LOL. I'll have to disappoint you though, because I think I'm not proficient enough in Quenya to correct any full sentences. But I've found a word inga meaning "at first" or "first of all" that could help you with the last sentence. On another note, please try to limit your Wikipedia userpage to WP-related stuff. De728631 (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Heh. I only put it there so you could see it. :-) I'll get rid of it soon and put it somewhere where it might belong better... Double sharp (talk) 06:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Amanda Hamilton.jpg

Hi - you deleted this image. Can I ask why? Permission was obtained by the image creator, Crawford Hill, for use in the public domain. What went wrong? If you help me get it reinstated and with the correct permissions, I would be extremely thankful. JackRubysDog (talk)

Please see also Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 August 29. We need a personal statement from Crawford Hill that he waived all rights for this photograph. The instructions how to proceed with emailing permissions-en@wikimedia.org had already been posted to your talk page. So because we didn't get any such confirmation from Mr. Hill I had to delete the file. De728631 (talk) 12:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi - Mr Hill assures me he sent confirmation to the correct email addressJackRubysDog (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. Our volunteer email team will check the permissions email and then they'll decide if the confirmation is valid or possibly insufficient. De728631 (talk) 15:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The OTRS team could not find any tickets/messages related to this image so I've deleted it again. De728631 (talk) 20:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Ɱ's talk page.

consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle-earth

Thanks for the explanation! So, if we have a consensus, we have to delete the images on these pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dol_Guldur and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mirkwood) too, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Picture Master (talk • contribs) 22:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Not really. These are not fan art but were drawn by professional artist Tom Loback who has repeatedly published his works in the Tolkien Calendar and several journals. De728631 (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Celine McNeil

I'd take the editor at face value. We cannot delete the account for legal reasons, but we can get a bureaucrat to rename it as "Vanished User", and I can oversight the edit and log entry. See if you can take care of the former; I've been a little busy offline lately and may not be able to get to it today. Daniel Case (talk) 16:33, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright. I have oversighted the one edit that tied the identity back to the user. Daniel Case (talk) 01:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Handbibliothek

I do not know how it will work but I created a new entry on the English Wiki and my entry is now for deletion. I can prove the entry because I have the 2 books on my shelf and I did them not find an entry when I was looking at wiki. The books are something like the Harmsworth Self-Educator (I also own). Actually I would be a bit frustrated when my entry would be deleted.

Gerd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guitarre 1 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 August 2013

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey De728631. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

The Hobbit Original Complete Soundtrack

In regards to your message below, yes, please create a redirect to the game article. Thanks for your help, -Rod

Hello Rednote, I'm a contributor for said Wikiproject Middle-earth. I've had a look at your proposed article and I found that apart from the actual track list, all major information is already present in the article on the game, The Hobbit (2003 video game). And I can't find any reliable references that would suggest a special notability of this soundtrack recording. We could however create a redirect to the game article, so people looking for the soundtrack will automatically be referred to this article. How's that? De728631 (talk) 15:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.169.147.83 (talk)

I have actually created a redirect The Hobbit soundtrack that points at Music of The Hobbit film series which is much more noteworthy than the game's soundtrack. At the top of the film score article there is however a note "'The Hobbit soundtrack' redirects here. For the award-winning soundtrack of the 2003 video game, see The Hobbit (2003 video game)." So people can now also find the game's soundtrack. It would be very convenient though if you could find a source for that 2004 award. Unfortunately the website of the 2nd Annual GANG Awards doesn't show any results. De728631 (talk) 13:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Revival rock for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Revival rock 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/Revival rock 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. older ≠ wiser 10:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Template

A little accusatory aren't we. In your closing it, I assume you examined why it was open, in good faith, and saw that I was editing and creating articles to fill it up. Collapsing it makes more work for me. You also in good faith looked at the various other Iranian counties templates and saw that they were closed once populated. After all your good faith examination, you decided to make more work for me anyway for no particular reason. Or maybe you didn't do any examination and your good faith is misplaced. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Point taken. :-) and keep up the good work npp'ing. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

G13- Don't count bot edits

Hi there. Just a friendly note, when checking if a G13 is valid do not count edits made by bots, you need to go last human edit. You reverted a G13 I'd placed on an article that had been abandoned since July 2012. Oh and please when giving people advice, can you do so respectfully? I respect your dilligence in checking these things out, but I'm sorry to have to tell you that this time you have made a mistake Keep up the good work. Thanks. Rankersbo (talk) 18:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for confusing July 2012 with this year's July – no disrespect intended. De728631 (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Der Busant

wäre etwas für "Schon gewusst?" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. De728631 (talk) 19:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Here goes nothing...

I couldn't resist starting to rewrite the Telerin article (which is currently frankly terrible). Double sharp (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Excellent idea! I have to admit though that I know nothing about Telerin. But maybe Maunus who was reviewer in the Quenya GA process is interested in working on it. He's also much more into linguistics than I am. Btw, please put a {{user draft}} on your draft page just to avoid confusion. De728631 (talk) 14:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, now you can change that. :-) Double sharp (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Maunus has told me that he wants to stay out of Tolkien's conlangs for a while. Well... Double sharp (talk) 08:06, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Extended Fëanorian anti-Valar ranting

On why I chose this rather than Sindarin to work on: (1) it was far worse, (2) it's similar to Quenya, a GA, so I can steal your structure and (3) (very bad reason) I like Olwë much more than Elwë as a character(!). Double sharp (talk) 16:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Haha. You've got some good points there. But I've always found the Teleri a bit obscure when compared to the Sindar, or – of course – the Fëanorian folks. De728631 (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes indeed. But hey, (WARNING: LONG FËANORIAN RANT APPROACHING)

(puts on Fëanorian star) Thingol still seems to think all of Beleriand is his when he's pretty much disowned the North Thindar (see what I did there), and his refusing to let any Noldor into his kingdom except in great need, except of course that Celegorm and Curufin being driven from Himlad isn't apparently great enough need. :-P And don't quite a few Thindar desert to Doriath during the Bragollach? :-P They've been in Beleriand, they should have fighting experience already – so what's up? Not that I endorse the second and third kinslayings, but Dior had quite a bit of time to respond, and he didn't even do that?! Though attacking in winter was not quite right IMHO. (Melian even thinks the Fëanorians should get it, doesn't she? Despite the Kinslaying which she already knows about? Um, Eönwë? What? They've done it another two times because (my thoughts) they cannot fight Morgoth anymore effectively, and now they are desperate to get back the one Silmaril within their reach so that the Oath will stop. It's canonically a huge burden, right?)

The Teleri, on the other hand – yes, they don't do much in the story except refuse Fëanor's request and get themselves killed. This actually will go into the article, as it's been pointed out by (Fauskanger?) that it shows that Tolkien's languages were very important to him, because it never really plays any real role outside helping Ñoldorin linguist reconstruct Primitive Quendian?! From an in-universe perspective, (puts on Fëanorian star again) they refused to give the ships, but it's more understandable. Morgoth hasn't been messing with them, so they don't see what the fuss is, and they weren't at the trial or anything so they still trust the Valar about what's going on. Finwë being exiled – due to their limited knowledge of this they may have misinterpreted the situation. And once Finwë and Fëanor are gone, nobody's about to tell them their side of the story. :-P So Olwë doesn't see what the fuss is all about, and as a friend counsels Fëanor to cool off and wait for the Valar to act. Except that the Darkening is already quite a few solar years ago. ;-)

Naturally, Fëanor sees it as a betrayal and steals the ships. But he thinks he can do it without killing blah blah blah, and when he has to...well, I feel the burning at Losgar is not just because he's worried that Fingolfin will betray him (Shibboleth = canon for me) and he doesn't really need betrayal when he's fighting Morgoth, but also because he can't think about the ships or use them anymore without thinking of the terrible things he did to get them. And I don't hold it against him. :-)

Olwë's feelings on Elwë: now why do none of the Teleri (Celeborn is a Thinda!!!) go or desire to go to search for their forsaken kin? Maybe the Valar (or Morgoth) saying that they faded from the histories or something like the Avari did? (Because nothing outside Valinor is important (sarcasm).) Maybe he just gave up hope? He was alive at Cuiviénen: he knows what usually happened to lost elves: why should Elwë be any different? (Of course it was, but he doesn't know that!)

And my favourite quote about the Teleri: "Few of the Teleri were willing to go forth to war, for they remembered the slaying at the Swan-haven, and the rape of their ships; but they hearkened to Elwing, who was the daughter of Dior Eluchíl and come of their own kindred, and they sent mariners enough to sail the ships that bore the host of Valinor east over the sea. Yet they stayed aboard their vessels, and none of them set foot upon the Hither Lands." This for some reason gives me the image of Olwë on a ship going up the Sirion shooting at any random creatures of Morgoth to avenge his brothers(!!! – I know, but if he was there, I guess he wouldn't have taken it out on the Fëanorians, because then he would probably know what was up. Maybe leave them for later. Were Maedhros and Maglor fighting at the War of Wrath??!!)

This has gone on too long already and really is not Wikipedia material! Double sharp (talk) 02:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Since Telerin is far more fragmentary than Quenya, but related to Quenya, and the sound shifts are clear, the vocabulary is not hard to reconstruct: the key word is reconstruct, so that I need to explain what * and ** mean very early! (Got ideas for a good placement?)

I really also should explain much earlier than the rest of the orthography stuff that v means [w], as it will mess with our English-speaking readers. (j in Primitive Quendian can be uniformly replaced with y (that's what Christopher Tolkien did, after all), so it's not an issue.) þ should also be explained at this point. (Quenya has no such problems.) Double sharp (talk) 11:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Am I going into too much detail? Double sharp (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I liked your excursion about the possible motivations of Olwë and Elwë. Actually I can imagine that Maedhros and Maglor played an active role in the War of Wrath, only to be tempted afterwards by their oath. And if anyone is to blame for neglect and carelessness in the whole wars of Beleriand, imo its the Valar – I always wondered how they managed to pretend that Middle-earth was not their business until Eärendil made his epic voyage. Which makes them even more interesting from thematical point of view since even the lesser 'gods' of Arda are not infallible. De728631 (talk) 17:32, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

To be fair, I don't really get furious at Thingol until his demand for a Silmaril. Before that, I guess he's just being overly cautious.

The Valar – well, every time they make war on Morgoth, bad things happen. :-) I can understand why they wouldn't want to send out their host until they got some message. Maybe Eru told Manwë or something that there would be a messenger??

But now I'm thinking: why Eärendil, and not Voronwë and co.? Turgon does seem to think at this point that it would be a good idea to return to Valinor and seek pardon. Why do they not let him? They said that they would only hear prayers for pardon. What is this? Isn't Turgon the High King of the Ñoldor at that time? Presumably he wasn't just interested in saving his own skin, because all the Ñoldor remaining in Middle-earth (and quite a few of the Thindar) are now his people! If the Valar just wanted to make sure Eärendil existed, then this is really using the Elves...

Meanwhile in Valinor...

Ulmo: "You have used me. I have spied for you, made myself appear to be working against you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Turgon and Eärendil safe. Now you tell me you have been making sure Eärendil survive to be just our message-boy, and then doom him to—"

Everyone else: "But this is touching, Ulmo. Do you really care for all those stupid Ñoldor who rejected us AND WILL DIE, after all?"

— with apologies to J.K.Rowling

But seriously, Eärendil and Elwing's eventual fate? Not something I would want. (Out of curiosity, does Elrond identify as Eärendil's or Maglor's son?)

Let's not even go into the Doom of Mandos and how the Valar handled Finwë's and Fëanor's cases. Double sharp (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I think Turgon and the Gondolindhrim never intended to return to Aman. Voronwë was sent to seek a passage to Aman and ask for support against Morgoth in Beleriand, but not for forgiveness and for permission to return. Even when Tuor delivers Ulmo's message to Turgon that Gondolin should be abandoned and Turgon should relocate to the mouth of Sirion, Turgon is not impressed but rather relies on his stealthy fortress. In the Silm, this section tells us also that the elves of Gondolin after the Nirnaeth didn't have any desire to ever meddle again in the affairs of humans or the other peoples of Beleriand or the West. As to Elrond, I think he did identify as the son of Eärendil. At least Elladan and Elrohir apparently remembered their grandpa when they wore silvery stars upon their brows in the Battle of the Pelennor. If Elrond saw himself in the tradition of Maglor, i.e. Noldorin royalty, he could as well have claimed the High Kingship of the Noldor. De728631 (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for messing up there, I don't really care that much for the Gondolindhrim, so do not trust me there. :-) But they didn't really have to kill them. Just maybe send them back with fierce storms and a firm "No, you started this, you deal with it." And they do listen to a prayer that isn't for forgiveness (Fingon's for...accurate shots to kill Maedhros and pity). I wonder why? Is Fingon that awesome or important to them? (Hint: I don't think so)

But still. That makes Turgon a rather lousy High King in my opinion. (drops him down in rating) Maybe Gil-galad was doing the actual work then already?! (would make sense) But I can sort of understand his not wanting to leave Gondolin. He spoke against Fëanor. He obviously misses Tirion and thinks the Ñoldor were better off there. He did not want to leave Aman. (Why? TBH I never thought too much about Turgon; but there may be some parallel with him not wanting to leave Gondolin.)

Aww, no one likes the Fëanorians. A plausible excuse for him not claiming the High Kingship may be that there wasn't really a Ñoldor community to be high king of! (Incidentally, light of Eärendil? Meh.)

Tangent: I like the version where Celebrimbor is a Teler. Seriously. But heavily edited so that I don't have to make Celeborn a Teler too. Maybe he realised how Alqualondë had started and tried his best to stay out of the fight. For extra emotional issues^TM get him called a traitor by someone for trying to stay out of the madness. ...........) Double sharp (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Substing templates

Hi! Just wanted to remind you that when you use a welcome template on someone's talkpage, that you should always substitute the template. (For example, you should use {{subst:welcome}} rather than {{welcome}}.) Cheers, — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 00:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I use to substitute all the user warning templates but I wasn't aware that "welcome" needed a subst, too. De728631 (talk) 00:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Happy editing! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 00:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Re:

In my view that's not so wise, they are all confirmed and locked puppets, anyway I've removed again just a comment with a grossly insulting username in signature. --Vituzzu (talk) 00:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Err, two abusive usernames. --Vituzzu (talk) 00:40, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Music of The Lord of the Rings film series, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

HP Cloud Service

Hi, I see you recently reverted my conversion of HP Cloud Services into a redirect. This is to let you know that I've rebuilt it as a stub and explained my reasons in detail on the talk page here. If you disagree, please can we discuss on the talk page? Thanks - Pointillist (talk) 10:11, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I've commented over there. De728631 (talk) 12:58, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Der Busant

On 10 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Der Busant, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that an episode in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream may have been a "riff" on the medieval German poem Der Busant? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Der Busant. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

So I translated Namárië into Telerin just to have a taste of it

See User talk:Double sharp/Telerin. Feel free to examine the differences before looking at the article, sources and my commentary on my translation. I'd love to have a comparison like this (Velasco translated it too), but Velasco's is kinda outdated by what we now know about Telerin phonology and grammar and mine is complete OR. So it looks like we will just compare Tolkien's own text in the article. Double sharp (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Wow. That may in fact be enlightening for understanding the development of the various languages. I've left you a first comment at the poetry page. On a general note, in the article you should also mention Lindarin/Lindalambe as the alternative internal names for the language of the Teleri. These two are referenced by Fauskanger and Pesch (p. 43). De728631 (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

lede, 2nd paragraph gives those names. I will mention them below in internal history once I sort that mess out. :-) Double sharp (talk) 04:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

There is a Þindarin version too. But my knowledge of that Tolkien language is dubious at best, so I'll refrain from sticking my fingers into it! :-) Double sharp (talk) 06:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Seen your comment, replied with my excuses for the completely asterisk-worthy forms I used. :-) Double sharp (talk) 07:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

By the way, in the article your reference No. 3 'Tikka' is undefined and I can't find it in the edit history either. De728631 (talk) 14:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

stolen from your Quenya article. :-) will add it soon. Double sharp (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I knew the name sounded familiar but chicken tikka was obviously unrelated. De728631 (talk) 15:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I just realised that a pretty easy way to make the [eu] and [iu] diphthongs for English speakers is to just start with [eɫ] and [iɫ] and then vocalize the [ɫ] to [w]. This can be seen pretty clearly through a Polonicized spelling pędi, kełra for Telerin. :-D Double sharp (talk) 03:28, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Dobrze! :D De728631 (talk) 12:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Dziękuję. :-) Double sharp (talk) 14:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The L-vocalization strategy also works for all the -w's in the syllable coda in archaic Þindarin! (e.g. harw, pl. heirw "wound") Double sharp (talk) 11:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Ennai Valartha Bharathi

Hi,

Why did you merge my contribution Ennai Valartha Bharathi with Ma.Po.Si? Meenbas16 (talk) 14:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I merged it because that book is not notable by itself. Unless you can provide several reliable secondary sources that have treated Ennai Valartha Bharathi in depth, it is not suited for an encyclopedical article of its own. Please see also WP:NBOOK for more information on notability requirements. De728631 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I had provided the link below:

http://www.dailythanthi.com/node/364255

It is a review on the book provided by Daily Thanthi,a leading Tamil Daily in Tamil Nadu,India.This book is very important as it details ,how Ma.Po.Si was inspired in his literary journey. Please let me know if you have any further questions.Thanks! Meenbas16 (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but a single review is still not sufficient to show the book's notability and to warrant a stand-alone article. What you can do, however, is to include a brief summary of that review in the article about Ma.Po.Si where the book is mentioned. For an article on the book we would need, like, three different reviews. De728631 (talk) 18:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

"Carbon" in Quenya

Fauskanger reconstructed *hyulma for "charcoal", from the root YUL "smoulder" (primitive *s-yul-mā) for his translation of the Johannine corpus. So *hyulmároa? (The use of the long vowel is a joke; *hyulmaroa is almost certainly better. Latin carbōnem, the source of the English word, is according to Wiktionary the accusative singular of carbō. So I used the Quenya book accusative form with the final long vowel!) Double sharp (talk) 15:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

(This is 3rd Age pronunciation: 1st Age – I think – would have *hyulmahroa, *hyulmáhroa). Double sharp (talk) 03:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thank you for nominating Gladsax Castle. I appreciate that you read the article and took the time to create the nom. Rosiestep (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Mmmm, strawberries! De728631 (talk) 20:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

i want

i want talk to Jimmy Wales , can i edit his talk page at wikia pedia?!۝ ۝ (talk) 23:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Jimbo Wales is where you want to go. De728631 (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

u kant be seriously.its unbelievable! i feel fear to put smting in his talk page. he is a well known and famous man.another thing, he is atheist , but im not. why he converted? western ppl are kristian.i want invite him to back to worshiping God.۝ ۝ (talk) 14:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

If you would like to address Jimbo about his believes, please use his talk page or try to email him via his account. But remember that Wikipedia user talk pages should generally be used for Wikipedia-related messages and not for personal communication of this type. I for one don't care about the personal believes of any user because that is everyone's own business. De728631 (talk) 14:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

me too. i said to him what was i want, he is Busy and i know he dont read his talk pages. ۝ ۝ (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

mass vandalism of jainism related article by single person

Few articles related to jainism has been vandalized. The pages such as jainism digambara Śvētāmbarahas suffered a major changes from single user using multiple user IDs ,most of them are blocked. Rahul_RJ_jain

Rahuljain2307

He also goes with name

Rahul Jain

The Rahul Jain

I request you to restore the page to earlier version.you have once blocked his user id so but vandalism is still taking place i request you to freeze the articles related to jainism if possible.

thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravjns (talk • contribs) 10:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any vandalism here. If you disagree with bold edits or article content, please discuss the issues on the related article talk pages. As to the account, The Rahul Jain is currently the valid user account for all those older ones with the same name, so there is no sockpuppetry going on. This user agreed to only use the account "The Rahul Jain" and was therefore unblocked. You should only report him for sockpuppetry if you find any newly created accounts with this name. De728631 (talk) 17:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Amanbir Grewal

Hi: We're having contentious editing at Runes by a 117 IP who has been signing as amanbir and amanbir grewal on Talk:Runes and on my talk page. The edit summary here especially concerns me. I note that there was an AN/I report of much more serious nationalist bigotry in October last year that ended with you blocking someone calling himself Amanbir Singh; that User:Amanbir Singh was indef-blocked by Materialscientist in November last year, which was followed by an AN/I report of threats by an IP signing Amanbir Singh; that User:Amanbir Singh Grewal was blocked twice for edit warring in August this year (currently unblocked, so I have asked the IP at Talk:Runes whether they are the same person); that there was an AN/I report that month mentioning IP use but not the indef block of the prior account, and referring back to this AN/I report earlier the same month, which refers to User:Mokshanine, who requested rename to User:Amanbirgrewal. So I'm thinking all the user names are the same person, with and without Singh ... but as the last admin to deal with a range of IPs in this connection, do you agree? The disruption this time seems less than what is reported at AN/I. And if it is the same person, do you advocate I post at AN/I linking all the user names and requesting a ban? Or should we return to "block on sight"? Sorry, that was as brief and coherent as I could make it; I have a feeling I've exhausted the strategy of reasoned responses. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hrm, this is concerning. I'm hearing quite some quacking in the edits of Amanbir Singh Grewal when compared to Amanbir Singh: e.g. St. Paul's School, Darjeeling or the immediate blanking of their user talk page once an "inconvenient" message comes in. We could try and start a SPI but I think we're better off seeking a formal ban at WP:AN. You might also want to ask Elockid for a range block on 117.something. In that 2012 ANI discussion he was reluctant because of the collateral damage, but as this range continues to be troublesome I think we should block a part of it. De728631 (talk) 17:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think the 2 Singhs being the same person is the most obvious element. It will take me a while to draft a report and submit it - stuff happening offline - but I'll do so and then notify all 3 registered names. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Done - badly, no doubt, but done. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Obviously it wasn't so bad at all. For the record: Mokshanine and related sockpuppets of all kind have been banned from enwiki per WP:AN consensus. De728631 (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw, thanks to you and to Drmies, who urged closure. That will lighten my conscience if I see him again. But I have to think his repeatedly vandalizing the noticeboard itself didn't make him look good. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Not to mention the little article he wrote for you. ;) De728631 (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of 2013 Berlin helicopter crash for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2013 Berlin helicopter crash 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/2013 Berlin helicopter crash (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.--FoxyOrange (talk) 11:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Stop It!

Listen, Stop deleting Wikipedia articles! Every article deserves to be given a chance, If edited properly. It doesnt matter what you think on personal opinion! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koy Hoffman (talk • contribs) 18:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I didn't any articles you started, but you should probably read our criteria for general notability of article subjects which explains that not every article is actually a valuable contribution that deserves to be kept. I have also explained to you why your talk page comment (which was not an article) was rightfully removed by another editor. And last but not least, ranting like this won't get you very far here – in the end it will only lead to you being blocked from editing, which isn't desirable for anyone. So I'd like to ask you to cool down and focus on contributing to our articles instead. De728631 (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

This isn't some fight. But articles ARE being constantly deleted because they are not desirable to other people, And thats not right! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koy Hoffman (talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

But that course was once decided by the Wikipedia community by consensus. If you think that articles should not be deleted for lack of notability you'll have to convince the majority of Wikipedia editors that the notability guideline and our inclusion criteria should be changed. On another note, please sign your talk page contributions by typing four tilde characters ~~~~. This will add your username and a timestamp for reference (N.B.: article content is not signed). De728631 (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gladsaxehus

On 4 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gladsaxehus, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the former manor of Gladsaxehus in Sweden was once bequeathed to become a nunnery of Dominicans, but Queen Margaret preferred it to remain a strategic royal fief? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gladsaxehus. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

SG for "Der Busant"

On 28 September 2013, Schon gewusst? was updated with a fact from your translation of the article "Der Busant", which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was: Das mittelalterliche Versepos Der Busant handelt von einem Bussard, Abenteuern im Wald und einer Liebesgeschichte.. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (quick check).

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

I was cheeky enough to edit that; I hope I didn't muck it up. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, only little bit. ;-) And thanks to Gerda for notifying me.De728631 (talk) 13:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you see again why I only have "read" Babelboxes :-) Sorry. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Right now I have a translation on SG, Library of Birmingham, my new hobby after leaving the music projects is to translate articles of the banned or almost banned ;) - If you are serious about your userbox, and bold, there's this letter ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Quite an interesting letter. I guess I need not mention my feelings about it but this whole infobox arbcom turnout makes me want to quote from a ballad that fits into the Busant's time: "des bin ich gar sere betrübet". De728631 (talk) 19:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

... which matches Bach's cantata title perfectly: "Warum betrübst du dich, mein Herz" - but I simply refuse to do so and keep singing, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

"Ich steh hier und singe"?! Blatant soapboxing! ;) De728631 (talk) 20:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Lakenmediagroup

He's requesting unblock, and since he never edited I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt provided he is one person and doesn't violate COI. Daniel Case (talk) 22:49, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually he doesn't need to be unblocked because there's no reason for keeping this account and changing the name. Since he hasn't made any substantial edits it would be much easier for him to create a new account from scratch. Going through the renaming process only takes time and creates more work for the crats. De728631 (talk) 12:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Daniel, you strike me as a nice guy when I see your comments at UAA, so much nicer than me. The user name clearly indicates not an individual--so how is that not a username violation? Drmies (talk) 04:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Digital Energy Technologies

Hi, i've seen you deleted my page about Digital Energy Technologies. I do understand your deletion, but i think it's not necesary. I know that creating a page about a company can de a little difficult, but this company has been providing services for me for many years, and i thought it deserved a wiki page. So though i don't have many information about the company, only the info I gould get from their webpage, I truly think that this company can have a wiki page. It has 3 offices over Europe and provides hosting services for hundreds of thousands of people, it's not like it's some local store. Besides i think that this page can help in the future people know better the company, so users can upload both good and bad news about it. So please consider your deletion, i am able to edit as many parts as you wish so it can meet Wikipedia criteria, it's not like i would die for it, but it took me a long time to do. Thank you.Elandroid (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Bericht

Sie haben ein neues Berich auf ihre Benutzer pagina! Mussen sie unmittelbar lesen! Sehr wichtig! Bis Spaetzle, Drmies (talk) 04:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I've seen that. I have to admit that I'm not too much into literature unless it's about a certain professor from Oxford. Which makes for an interesting temptation of original research for a possible connection between the Busant and motives from The Silmarillion.

You and Crisco should definitely keep up the good work – and I guess I'll have a look at the Busant from time to time. And let me know if you need help with obscure MHG phrases, source texts or some such. De728631 (talk) 14:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

King Damien Lazora (Nick)

You may well be right. I've tended to take the view that something recognisable as a book/film/video game is exempt from SD on notability alone (although there are often spam issues), but something like this lacks sufficient context to even tell us what it's about. I'm happy to go along with whatever you think is appropriate Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Gwyn Pritchard

Thanks for the revdeletes on Gwyn Pritchard. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. De728631 (talk) 19:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jamia Urdu, Aligarh

Can you revdelete all revisions up to and including 02:23, 16 October 2013‎, leaving the edit of 02:28, 16 October 2013 as the oldest visible edit? Copyright violations galore. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Requesting revision deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seven Arrows Elementary School

Please delete the revisions of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seven Arrows Elementary School from the beginning through this edit of 21:08, 17 October 2013 inclusive. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for revision deletion in Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/eleQtra

Copyright infringement was introduced with this edit of 11:09, 3 October 2013‎ and removed with the edit of this edit of 00:47, 17 October 2013. Please revision-delete from the first edit through the edit right before the second. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Done De728631 (talk) 17:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you address the request above this one and the request below this one as well? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Done and done. I've also blocked Citrusstudios for their username and promotional editing. De728631 (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks x4. Is there a centralized place to post requests for revision deletion that don't have privacy implications? REVDEL was originally conceived as a way to remove privacy-impacting edits and as such there was deliberately no central place on-wiki to request such edits. Now that copyvios are routinely being removed through revdel (not just by you, I might add) there should be a place on-wiki to request them. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:06, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I've just had a closer look at WP:REVDEL and noticed that I had to restore some of the previously hidden revisions. Deletion of revisions for copyright infringement can only be done when other edits by non-infringing contributors are not involved. So hiding a whole row of edits from the most recent to the article creation doesn't work when other contributors have edited inbetween. I appreciate your checking of AFCs for copyright issue but think the best solution for dealing with it will just be removing the text. And if the article is really new and noone has else than the infringing editor has touched it you can put a {{copyvio}} mask on it and report it at WP:Copyright issues or just use {{db-copyvio}}. Revdel may still be used though if the copyvio is the most recent revision but there's no central venue to request it. De728631 (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Crosslands Road listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Crosslands Road. Since you had some involvement with the Crosslands Road redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). The Whispering Wind (talk) 02:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. De728631 (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Editor User:AltynAsyr

Hey, from said user's talk page, it seems like you've encountered this user back in October. Well I need your help: The user has added a lot of material to the Awaza article. Frankly, the English is terrible. Some of the material is sourced, but my Russian is not sufficient to read whether it supports the source or not. We've reverted back and forth a couple times now, so to prevent an edit war, I figured I'd include anyone that has left something on the user's talk-page. Eik Corell (talk) 17:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me but to be honest, you are already edit warring over there. Please don't revert AltynAsyr again for the time being but leave it to others to improve the article. I've left her a warning at her talk page and tagged the article for cleanup. De728631 (talk) 17:49, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Template:Albumchart

Hi, I've noticed that you used to be active on the Albumchart template's talk page. I have two problems with links generated by the template – one is for the Finnish chart, and the other for Billboard Jazz chart. If you have some free time, could you please have a look at those two issues? Thanks. Mayast (talk) 12:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I think I've found a workaround for the Billboard Jazz links. Going to look into the Finland issue later tonight. De728631 (talk) 16:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Billboard Jazz now works great in that Mike Stern article :)
The template usually works ok for Finland, but in the mentioned case of Timberlake's album the slash in the title caused some problems. That's why I think it would be great if someone could add Finland2 (with links to Hung Medien's finnishcharts.com) as an alternative to ifpi.fi. Like there is Germany3 (charts.de) in addition to (musicline.de). — Mayast (talk) 17:52, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

What is an Inverter

Is redirect needed here? I think it should be deleted. -- L o g X 19:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

At least it's not nonsense as you suggested. I've therefore removed your speedy tag. If you think it should go, please list it at RFD. De728631 (talk) 19:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I like the disambiguate. -- L o g X 19:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Great. I just noticed the hatnote at Power inverter and thought this was the best solution. De728631 (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

That's great De728631!! -- L o g X 19:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Holy Roman Emperor

I think edit war is a bit strong. There were two reverts. One of yours and one of mine. I mentioned my problem with the text a month previous on the talk page of the article. I didn't mean to be abrasive. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 00:39, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Low German help needed

Hello De728631, I'm contacting you because we need some Low Saxon translators to help with the deployment of the new mw:Wikipedia:VisualEditor on nds.wikipedia. It is important that we get the User Guide and the User Interface translated before VisualEditor is deployed to users here. To translate the User Interface, you need to start an account at translatewiki.net. Translating the User Guide and other documentation happens at Mediawiki.org (your regular username and password work there), and then translated materials need to be copied over to nds.wikipedia.org at the appropriate page names.

More information on the translating work is available at MediaWiki: Translation Central. I know you're not active over there, but since I see you speak Low Saxon, I thought you might be interested. If you are able to help in any way, or if you have other questions or comments, please either reply here or send e-mail to me. Thanks for your time, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello there, and thanks for letting me know of this project. But although I speak it I'm not very good at writing Low German. And at the moment I don't have a lot of time either, so I regret to tell you that I can't be of any help there. De728631 (talk) 20:51, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. If you ever get more time for editing, then I'm sure you'd be welcome at http://nds.wikipedia.org I've asked a couple of other people for help with this, and I'm hopeful that someone will be able to work on this. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Good news and bad news

The bad news is that I wasted a lot of time looking into the Hkettani thread, and wrote up a two paragraph summary of what I was going to do, only to edit conflict with you on the close. Sigh. The good news is that your solution was almost exactly what I was going to do, so no arguing, just a "good job". Just please try to be either 15 minutes slower or 15 minutes faster next time. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe next time you should ping me in advance. :) De728631 (talk) 16:31, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

perhaps a "closing in progress" template is needed, so an admin can call dibs. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I like this idea. Putting a little sticker on top of the section will take a few seconds as opposed to the thoughtful formulating of closing rationales. On the other hand, we might as well use an external editor to write them up beforehand... De728631 (talk) 16:45, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Hkettani

while not for one minute questioning the merits of blocking Hkettani (his endless insinuations of ulterior motives from all and sundry were quite sufficient justification, even ignoring other issues), I'd like to put on record that I have grave doubts about the rationale you gave. Given that the paper Hkettani linked for us [19] displayed the same 'unorthodox' English usage as the material he submitted to Wikipedia, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect impersonation. Dr. Kettani of Fort Hays State University lists the paper on his CV, on the Fort Hays website, [20] so there would seem to be no possibility that this is another Kettani, or someone impersonating him. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

When it comes to living persons, the username policy is pretty clear imo. We'd rather block to prevent any damage to the real name than to assume that a user is in fact "John Smith" as it seems. If this is the real Dr. Kettani he may get his account unblocked by verifying his identity via email. The "endless insinuations" may have justified a NOTHERE-block as well, but if he continues down his battleground path the subsequent block will be covered by the topic ban. De728631 (talk) 16:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:01, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello De728631, I just wanted to let you know that Hkettani (talk · contribs) contacted WP:BASC and we are satisfied he is who he says he is and, therefore, I have just unblocked him. Cheers.

Salvio

^{Let's talk about it!} 12:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

That's alright. Thank you for notifying me. De728631 (talk) 16:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gula gubben

On 4 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gula gubben, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Gula gubben (the Yellowman) performs in yellow tight fitting tracksuits at different music festivals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gula gubben. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Trematosus

You reverted my attempt to delete the misconceived Trematosus with a comment that this was "not the way how to use speedy deletion". Would you mind explaining how I should have gone about deleting the page? You then redirected the article to Trematomus, claiming that that it seems like a "valid redirect". Trematosus was just a typo made by somebody who failed to clean up after themselves. It is not an alternate name for Trematomus. Nor is it a common or even a likely misspelling, existing on the web as little more than an eccentric Wikipedia typo. Is there a new policy to create redirects for typos on Wikipedia? --Epipelagic (talk) 22:55, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Redirects have always included likely spelling errors and this one seemed a plausible typo to me (WP:CSD: "Redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful"). As to deleting misspelled page names: The correct way would've been to move it to the correct title but at the time the other page had already been created from scratch. After such a move or after normal redirecting you can go ahead and use {{db-r3}} which is for recently created implausible redirects, but then there's still the risk of some other editor finding the redirect quite plausible. So if you still think that Trematosus is useless, please list it at WP:RFD to be on the safe side. De728631 (talk) 17:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

As the Google search shows, the typo is implausible; "S" is nowhere near "M" on the keyboard. It's a bizarre and gratuitous waste of time participating in such fussy rigmaroles just to correct minor errors. The lesson seems to be to let such errors stand on Wikipedia. --Epipelagic (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hi De728631, I am writing to in context of an addition to Mercedes-Benz Zetros. I have the permission from the owner regarding the addition. How do I proceed further?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingson87 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

German elections template

Just an FYI, these templates are only for public elections, hence why only two of the presidential elections are on them. This is why, for example, we only have one election on {{Turkish elections}} and {{Czech elections}}, and none since 1992 on {{Estonian elections}}, as they exclude the non-public elections. Cheers, Number 5 7 16:38, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hi, could you please take a look at this comment from an IP. This IP is not here to make any kind of meaningful contribution. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 20:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Some people should just be ignored. I've left them a final warning, so next time they're out. De728631 (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will ignore it. :) Thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:12, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

User:Bcnweedspot one more spam page to delete

Hi, my name is Stormmeteo. I've also tagged File:Cannabis Plant.jpg for g11, since Bcnweedspot used the file description for the same promotional content. Is it possible you speedy delete this one as well? Best regards ₪Stormmeteo ^Message 22:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, it's been taken care of. ₪Stormmeteo ^Message 22:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted it before I blocked him. De728631 (talk) 22:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I've been wondering about this

So if Maedhros and Maglor supposedly forfeited their rights to the Silmarils

why didn't Eönwë just give them to Celebrimbor?

Problem solved! Double sharp (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

That's a good question. Maybe the Valar just didn't trust the Feanorians any more. De728631 (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)