User talk:Ipatrol/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome

Sorry about that. I am having some trouble arranging the organization of my editor review page. As for my edit that you remarked upon, I am a little confused as to what you believe the bias is. Could you clarify?. Gaelen 00:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaelen S. (talk • contribs)

I was wondering, is there a requirement to join the CVU? StrikingHawk (talk) 02:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ipatrol! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! BMW(drive) 23:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Thanks and KeepUp the Good Work

Saw your additions to my User page :) I see you've been busy in the three weeks that you've had this userid ... makes me wonder if you've been here before? Happy editing! BMW(drive) 11:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey ... see below (about writing an essay about vague time first). I do very little surrounding templates overall... BMW(drive) 17:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Template:Vague Time

Hi Ipatrol. You have created the template Vague Time. I was wondering, on what Wiki policies or guidelines do you base your assumption that the four identified "vague time" qualifiers are to be avoided. Either there is no such policy or guideline in which the template should not exist; or there is such a guideline, in which case a wikilink in the template would help editors to understand why such words are to be avoided. Arnoutf (talk) 12:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably a good idea to write an essay about it first, try and have it become policy BMW(drive) 17:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:WORDS

Your wikilinks are welcome, but at WP:Words to avoid, there's no page by that name yet, so I can't evaluate whether it's a useful wikilink; please create the page first, then we'll have a look. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 14:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Wikipidia:Let the Reader Decide

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Largo Plazo (talk) 15:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I have declined the speedy for this but I have moved it to Wikipedia:Let the Reader Decide as there was a mistake in the spelling of Wikipedia in the title. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. You asked about creating project pages. Have a look at the 'Creating and maintaining' section at Wikipedia:WikiProject. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I think I may have misunderstood you when you referred to project pages. I thought you meant Wikiproject pages but I now think you mean essays. Anyway, Wikipedia:Wikipedia essays is your starting point for essays. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 16:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of that, what page did I not sign? If I don't sign something then chances are I am adding to a recently placed post I made. --Ipatrol (talk) 20:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Search this list for Ipatrol! — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You did not sign this post.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 12:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Surgery

I have moved Ipatrol: Doctor's office to User:Ipatrol/Doctor's office. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Please tell me it's a userpage subpage, I was invited to edit it. Oh, and what did I say anyway?--Faizaguo 08:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge of Economic crisis and Financial crisis

What you did was inappropriate on various counts. For one the merger as you did it left the history sections separate. For another there was no discussion of the matter at all. If you support a merge please express your opinion on the discussion pages or other relevant areas of wikipedia.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 02:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The merge tag was there for an hour and in general it was not appropriate.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edit to your own essay

In your recent edit to your own essay, you have, as already said, reintroduced misspelled words. A tenet is an opinion or belief. A tenent doesn't exist. A maniac is a noun, manic is an adjective. "Kampf" is German for "battle", "Kamph" does not exist. JIP | Talk 05:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I understand you're a native speaker of English, and I agree with your comment that maniac is a noun. The issue, however, is that you used the word "manic" instead. As I understand it, "maniac" is the correct word to use in this case, "manic" and "maniacal" are not. "Adolf Hitler was a homicidal..." requires a noun, not an adjective. JIP | Talk 19:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus

Hi, sorry, could you please provide a more direct link to the source of this image ? (link to the image page, or the name of the flicker account), cause "Vanity Fair (original, farm.3 flicker account)" was not enought for me to find it : there is no farm.3 account on flicker, Thx Lilyu (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop inserting the Vanity fair image into the miley cyrus article, it is not a free image and can't be used on Wikipedia. Thank You. Edgehead5150 ^talk 00:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

When i removed it the image didn't have any type of copyright status on it, now that is has the "public domain" tag i'll put it back. Edgehead5150 ^talk 00:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Copy of yur message on my talkpage: Excuse me, the username is John Durney apparently.--Ipatrol (talk) 23:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, now it's John Durney, but there is no John Durney flicker account.. Plus, the author is Annie Leibovitz, photographing her for Vanity Fair , as stated here : [1]. And now, you claim Vanity Fair has release it in public domain ? Sorry, but i'll request it's deletion, unless you bring quickly a proof that it's in the Public Domain.--Lilyu (talk) 00:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Copy of your message on User:Edgehead5150's talkpage I checked on Vanity Fair, It has been released for "non commercial use". Which means that someone can use it as long as they don't make money off of it. Look on it's commons page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipatrol (talk • contribs) 00:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Non commercial only licence cant be used on Wikimedia Commons, it's not a free licence, and it's not a Public Domain release. Please User:Edgehead5150, could you delete the image ?--Lilyu (talk) 01:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

i'm sorry, but no, that's just a general disclaimer from a website that is reproducing photos without any check of their licences DISCLAIMER at bottom of the page

It has nothing to do with Vanity Fair, Annie Leibovitz or this picture. I'm sorry, it's just a copyrighted picture, Commons cant publish it under a free licence. (and please, talk to me in english, thx for the translation, but it's impossible to understand when it's a computer that translate ^^)--Lilyu (talk) 02:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. I took the liberty of moving it to my talk page, I actually keep my user page plain by choice. I do appreciate the thought, though. Keep up the good work. --Michael Snow (talk) 04:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

La Clandestine page

You have added a comment that this page looks like an advertisement: I would be grateful if you could be more specific.

I ask because these comments were made quite a while ago and the page was changed at that stage - to the apparent satisfaction of WP editors in general at that time. Thanks and hope you don't mind me asking this here. Alanmoss (talk) 05:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

There is, what I consider to be, link spam from the same source now on the main absinthe article, to a blog promoting this brand. This time it sets a precedent for Wikipedia, as the data is copied from an orignal authority and it's inclusion is said to be useful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Absinthe#Dead_link_to_a_list_of_US-approved_absinthes_and_a_possible_alternative

Earlier the same tactic was used with cocktails:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Absinthe#Possible_Conflict_of_Interest

Also links have been placed to the brand page here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val-de-Travers_(district) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couvet

I would be grateful for editor assistance. Aside from this the main absinthe article is awash with commercial references of little value. Thanks FortDaniel (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop inserting links to your essay in guidelines pages

I know you've enjoyed working on your essay WP:Let the reader decide, Ipatrol, and you're welcome to keep working on it. But it's been pointed out that the link now in the See also section on that page, WP:NPOV#Let the facts speak for themselves, says the same thing ... using the same example. People have corrected misspellings; you've put them back in. Guidelines are there to represent community consensus, not for listing everyone's personal essays on the subject. Editors at WP:WORDS removed the link to that essay, and I'm removing the link at WP:PEACOCK now. Feel free to discuss on either of those talk pages, but please don't keep hopping from guideline to guideline; that's considered a form of forum shopping. (copied at essay talk page) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 14:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

what does this template do?

I just saw Template:DTFD and Template:DTFDB. Can you add an explanation on the talk page of when we are supposed to use them, and how they work? --Enric Naval (talk) 01:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, altough there is currently no deletion discussion process for removing just a section from a userpage, so the template is right now a bit confusing. I wish you luck getting the template into shape. --Enric Naval (talk) 01:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but...

Thanks for the wikibreak modification to my userpage, but I'm quite capable of making the proper changes . I keep messages like that on my header, so they appear on every page; your edit removed the header altogether, which sort of wrecked my page's navigation. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC) (it was also wrong; I won't be returning to regular editing once I'm done moving, since I've got two different shows once it's done. Yet another reason why you should be more cautious when editing someone else's userpage.)

Okay, seriously, stop

Radiant! doesn't need babysitting.

You obviously didn't get what I was saying last time. Stop policing other editors' userspaces; it's not your place to make content modifications. Each editor makes such announcements in their own manner, and established editors (such as myself and Radiant!) don't need assistance.

Furthermore, by you placing notices that they know nothing about, they might very well mistakenly be tagged as being on a break when they return, and most people don't constantly check their own userpages. For example, the only reason I noticed your edit to my userpage was because I happened to click the link at the top; had I clicked the "my talk" or custom "admin" link, I might very well not have noticed that you'd tagged me as being on a wiki-break (and erroneously stated when I'd be coming back).

If you notice a broken link or a typo on someone's userpage, by all means, make the fix. But when it comes to actually changing how someone has their userpage set up, don't. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday I _didn't_ leave a message saying that I'd noticed you changing other people's user pages. Perhaps I should have. It is not a good thing to alter people's own pages without a seriously good reason. Please don't ignore people reverting your changes, as I saw at least three examples checking your contributions yesterday. Please slow down and be more observant of the customs of this place. And look up the word 'tenet' please? And there is no namespace "Essay:" nor "Usrr". Really, watching things being done a bit more will help you know what are the good things to do. Shenme (talk) 23:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC) (not an admin or anybody special - I just worry)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Babylon logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Babylon 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 03:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Final warning

This is the third and last time I'm going to tell you: stop editing other people's userpages.

I've reverted your edit[2] to AAA!'s page. If he wants to add a service badge, he can; it's not your place to change other people's userpages.

Typos, redlinks, broken images, bypassing redirects... those are perfectly fine. But stop adding tags and templates to userpages that are not your own. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Customs again...

Did you know that things like this are frowned on (thought of as bad)? They are considered personal attacks if I understood the arguments correctly. And besides, that type of vandal is easily recognized and blocked. It is a repeat vandal. (sigh) And people like that, one can't tell, they may be 'for' and trying to give the other side a bad reputation, or they may be 'against' and not realizing the bad reputation they are giving their own side. It's all so complicated. Guard your reputation! Shenme (talk) 01:01, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Transcluding non-templates

Just add the namespace prefix so it's clear it's not a template, like {{Wikipedia:Some page}}. Indicate an article with just a : like {{:Some page}}. Gimmetrow 02:28, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:UBX/Cat owner

It's called a talk page, use it. YOU make your own version if you don't like this one. Consensus is to leave this box as worded. Oh and for the record, my cats deign me to feed them. I definitely do not own them. -Nard 19:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Huggle Scramble

Hey, sorry I was not near a computer when you sent the template. Anyways, I was wondering if you were using "new section" on the talk pages... And where is the mailing list located? Thanks. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 07:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Keg

Template:Keg has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Stuff from Wikinews

Reviewing articles

As you're new I'll point out that the GP article you've reviewed was written by a non-native English speaker. You're expected to correct some of the relatively small issues and not be too harsh. When you do reject work that you can tell is not from a native speaker give as much information as possible to help them get it through. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop pushing random articles into {{Review}}

Please stop pushing random articles into {{n:Review}}. There is generally a reason they are still in development. You just pushed 3 articles into {{n:review}} and all 3 failed for fairly obvious reasons. Wild Weather is stale. Friends of Pakistan you did _nothing_ to, other than mark it for review - which it had already undergone once before and failed. It still requires work - hence it being in Development. Lastly, Marathon record you again did _nothing_ for. The article isn't 3 paragraphs long, which is required per WN:SG. Additionally it has a damn section on the article itself titled "Development requests". Come on, are you even reading the articles? --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 20:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bad Thing

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Bad Thing, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Binksternet (talk) 05:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Bad Thing listed at RfD

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bad Thing. Since you had some involvement with the Bad Thing redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Binksternet (talk) 16:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The cabal users and long-term-abuse report

Why did you just warn and file an abuse report on two users who have been inactive for over four years? Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 07:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The have been? Sorry, I still haven't gotten the protocalls down.--Ipatrol (talk) 07:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Stubsensor code

Hi Ipatrol,

Stubsensor is made publicly available at https://triddle.projecthut.com/svn/triddle/stubsensor/ - you are welcome to do what ever you like with the software however it's a bit of researchware and not really designed to be used by normal people. First, it runs on the command line on unix platforms only, secondly it's really an entirely non-intuitive statistical analysis and text filtering system and nothing more, and lastly the interface to use it is via make and generated text files. To make sense of the output and to publish the results you'll need to perform shell magic or the time involved is far too great. It's really an expert system at this point more at home in a college's CS lab than anywhere else however if you are comfortable with that feel free to use it to your heart's content. Triddle (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Watchlists are useful

Hi. Do you have your own pages watchlisted? I noticed an IP address making changes to your user page, and got nervous, but that might be you? Some people forget to login and don't realize that until they've made some edits. Anyway, I try to put my own pages in my watchlist so that I will know if someone _else_ edits them. And when you get around to archiving your talk pages, put them on your watchlist also. Sound good? Shenme (talk) 02:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your ArbCom Vote

Thanks for your interest in this year's ArbCom elections. Unfortunately, we were required to set a criteria for voters, and that was decided to be the following:

• Voters must have a registered account that was created on or before November 1, 2008.
• Voters must have made 150 edits to articles on that account on or before November 1, 2008.

According to an automatic check, which I confirmed by looking at your contribution history, you have not met the requirements. Either you have not made 150 edits to articles (these edits must be in the main namespace) or you did not make them before the deadline of 23:59:59 November 1, 2008 (UTC). I've indented your votes. If you believe I sent this message in error, and that you do meet the requirements, please let me know on my talk page. Thanks, ST47 (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Your recent move

You wrote “I have said that the current title is non-neutral”, but I couldn't find the comment anywhere. Where can I find that? Could you please explain about your move without consensus at Talk:Dispute over the naming of the body of water between Japan and Korea? Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 14:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm asking you again. Please give us the explanation at the talk page above. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for the message on my talk page. But it would be more helpful to post your further explanation about the move on here. Because there are four users, including me, think the article title should be moved back. Looking forward to hearing from you on the article talk page. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 04:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:DTFD

Template:DTFD has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 19:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Explicit

Just want to let you know that I nominated Template:Explicit for deletion. If you agree with the deletion, you can add {{db-g7}} to the template page. Thanks, WODUP 20:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

BLP discussion, perhaps?

From Cool Hand Luke's Arbcom vote page: just remember that if somethings true, we ought to say it regardless if it hurts the subject.. I wondered, reading this, what you had in mind? Do you think we should include everything we can find in a verifiable source, even if it causes the subject to lose their job, be subject to harrassment (such as including personal details like address, telephone number)? I ask because there is a stark difference of opinion on Wikipedia about this, and I wondered what your thinking behind this vote was. If you have the time, that is. Best wishes, Fritzpoll (talk) 16:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Open accounts

You had edited a comment onto my userpage about open accounts. It should be noted that SPAs and open accounts have little in common. Additionally, please do not edit comments onto my user page. If you need to leave any comments for me, please put them on my talk page. I have moved the comments to my talk page for discussion if you would like. Thanks. Deletionismus (talk) 00:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines

I didn't realize until I looked at my talk page because I was in the process of making yet another change to the page during the time that the revert and un-revert (re-revert?) was done. I'd frankly welcome other wikipedia users comments on the page. I think I'm the only registered user working on it. Just about all of the other users are unregistered Filipinos throwing *their* group in without regard of where it goes, what it looks like or damage to other groups. The change this morning that added in Theta Rho Omega was actually fairly typical.Naraht (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

So the issue was the "Fix up overnight changes" as the edit summary, or was it actually some of the content of the change?Naraht (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Page move--thank you

		The Barnstar of Peace
		For having the foresight to diffuse a potential argument. Re:Is the Holocaust Unique? (book). Thank you. Inclusionist (talk) 00:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The argument is inevitable I fear, as I was just reported to ANI and asked to be indefinitely banned, but you helped diffuse the argument for now. Inclusionist (talk) 00:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I am deeply sorry you misunderstand my motives. Please don't call me names like "troll".Inclusionist (talk) 01:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Sir, I am sorry that I offended you.

I was sincere giving out my Barnstar.

I was very sincere in my question on Holocaust deniers, which I also posted somewhere else. I am obviously not alone in this question, I have counted at least 30 scholars who have asked the same question, many of them concluding that the Holocaust is unique.

I am very inquisitive, and post questions all the time, on several different websites. Asking questions is normal on the talk page, I have seen it a million times.

I will not go into the definition of trolling, I won't convince you one way or the other. So far "several other editors" is you and Steven. I am impressed with your knowledge of acronyms, you are obviously a veteran editor who has contributed a lot to wikipedia.

I will not discuss the merits of my question on wikipedia because I fear that you, or other editors who are sensitive to this issue, will use my words to punish me.

I used to be Mormon, even went on a two year mission, and when I started to leave the church, I felt the same intolerance to open questions that I am seeing today. Certain issues are sacred, certain issues should not be discussed. I found those views too contrasting, causing illogical conclusions, and little mental progress.

Thank you for not making this issue bigger than it is.

The more I learn about you, and the more I interact with you, the more I believe that you really deserved barnstar. Have a good evening. Inclusionist (talk) 01:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Gaphic Lab Request

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at WP:GL/I.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

§hep • ¡Talk to me! 05:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

"Censorship'

My edit to "Vaginismus" was to remove vandalism. Thanks anyway, I suppose. Hashshashin (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Afd-mergeto

Hello! I'm the creator of this template and the one who speedily closed your previous deletion nomination of Maja Einstein as premature. I'm disappointed to see that you renominated it again so soon, and this appears to stem from a misunderstanding that I should have addressed previously.
Any article tagged with the {{afd-mergeto}} template has been nominated for deletion and failed to achieve consensus that it should remain a separate article, so if it sticks around for a while, it's likely to be re-nominated for whatever reason it was nominated in the first place. The wording in question is intended to serve as a warning of that, not as a deletion rationale in and of itself.
Please nominate articles for deletion only when you believe that they should be deleted (not when you believe that they haven't been merged promptly enough). Thank you! —David Levy 06:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hello Ipatrol, I have granted your account rollback in accordance with your request. Please remember that rollback is for reverting vandalism/spam, and that misuse of the tool, either by revert-warring with other users, or simply reverting edits you disagree with, can lead to it being removed. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 01:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Port of Albany-Rensselaer edits

I did an "undo" of your edits on Port of Albany-Rensselaer because, amongst other things, you changed single digit numbers that were spelled out to the digit form (nine changed to 9), wikipedia guidelines suggest that they be spelled out, and this tends to be the guidelines for academic papers and other manuals of style as well. Your other edits probably were good ideas but as you had so many and such sweeping edits all in one I just undid the whole thing. I don't want to discourage you from editing, I just suggest you do one type at a time so others can comment or disagree or agree and not throw the baby out with the bathwater like I did. I apologize! Camelbinky (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Jet Airways former fleet

Dosent make sense to have a table for phased out aircraft when they can be simply mentioned in a paragraph.116.71.37.5 (talk) 18:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem was the table was removed without being replaced by a paragraph.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I distinctly recall replacing it with a paragraph, will check.116.71.46.157 (talk) 17:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok here is my edit details, as you can see I did replace the table with a paragraph:

Revision as of 18:39, 19 December 2008 (edit) (undo) 116.71.37.5 (Talk) (→Retired Fleet) Next edit → Line 164: Line 164:

Retired Fleet (section header) Previously Jet Airways also opearted Airbus A340-300 leased from South African Airways, as well as their own Boeing 737-300, Boeing 737-400 and Boeing 737-500 family of aircraft.116.71.46.157 (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Serial killer revert for guidelines of external links

Take a good look of my contributtion to Serial killer and you would see I didn't add those links to the article, just reorganize the Medical professionals section. kmilo0 (talk) 21:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC) (I was 190.24.146.120)

Fixed, sorry.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

north catholic

i just want to know what is "unconstructive" about the edit yes some of it needs removed but not all i will fix it but the ranking information seems accurate and aeronowak said he went there —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southpw (talk • contribs) 23:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

You may restore the encyclopedic content, but not the unsourced, biased assumptions about quality of education.--Ipatrol (talk) 23:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Too many photos

Any idea what to do with {{Too many photos}}? I see little use for it and its only transclusion, Apsara, dumps the page into a red link category (Category:Pages with too many photos). I noticed you tried to db-author it. I don't think the page has too many images, which I've never seen as a problem anyway. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Vague Time

Template:Vague Time has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Let the reader decide

Also, what do you plan to do about this essay? Essays should only be in "Wikipedia:" space if they're widely cited, which that one doesn't seem to be. Would it be okay if I moved it to your userspace? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, I guess that works. What about that "Too many photos" template, though? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 02:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

About my edits (From User:74.12.105.244)

You reverted my edits to the pages Georg, Duke of Mecklenburg and Duke Georg Alexander of Mecklenburg on the basis that it was vandalism. I can assure you that it most certainly was not, and in fact, my edits were based on information in the main text of the article. Could you please allow my edits to go through? Thank you. 74.12.105.244 (talk) 17:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

• My editing was not original research. The text simply is not clear enough. It if would be better, I can make the relevant information in the text more clear (with citations), so that the titles and styles make sense. About using the designation "pretender", it is a matter of consistency with other articles on deposed royalty. It indicates that a given title is claimed but not legal, and it is used overwhelmingly for the former ruling houses of Germany. 74.12.105.244 (talk) 17:25, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Really, I don't think that it would be considered derogatory because after all, there are entire succession boxes at the bottom of all these pages on royalty that are categorised as Titles "in pretence". 74.12.105.244 (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Emirates skycargo destinations

List updated in accordance with website http://www.skycargo.com schedules.116.71.46.157 (talk) 17:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Top 100 Hits

Hello, and thank your for your contributions. I noticed that 189.18.173.81 (talk) has made several suspicious edits to various chart pages, some of which you have reverted. I suspect the others may need to be reverted also, but I cannot find a source to confirm this. Can you check these edits? Thanks -- Tcncv (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"Grammer"

I'm afraid the proper term from "grammer" is "grammar," and the proper singular of "alumni" is "alumnus." Please don't revert grammatical changes until you have gone on to learn a sufficient amount of proper grammar yourself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.84.32 (talk • contribs)

Huggle

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Washburnmav (talk) 19:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Too many photos

Template:Too many photos has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Introductions

Hello, I'm wondering if you've seen the responses to your CFD for Category:Introductions. As I pointed out, it is very simply, premature, to ask for a category to be deleted when the articles that belong there still exist. Cgingold (talk) 22:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Ansley Adams

Hey, I've removed your speedy from this article and replaced it with the "non-notable person" tag. The article did not fall within the remit of the nonsense tag; it was not gibberish, or so badly formed that nobody could make head or tail of it. Ironholds (talk) 19:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Vote-Opinion

Template:Vote-Opinion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Vote-Oppose

Template:Vote-Oppose has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Vote-Possible

Template:Vote-Possible has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Vote-Support

Template:Vote-Support has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

struggle for User talk:216.118.68.193

Since you're the only registered user who outed themself as using user:216.118.68.193, I'm wondering what you say to the struggle taking place there. Who owns an IP user address, after all? — Sebastian 19:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)    (I stopped watching this page. If you would like to continue the talk, please do so here and ping me.)

Nick Savoy

Hi lpatrol,

I've been working on the "Nick Savoy" page that was previously deleted. With this new and rewritten article I would like to put it back up again. I would appreciate your feedback on the page of Nick Savoy before I put it back on DRV. Thanks in advance.Coaster7 (talk) 02:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD Voting

Hi, you recently voted on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piano rock and used an image in addition to your vote. As images increase the already quite large load time of the AfD log pages, please refrain from using them in the future. Thanks, and keep up the good work! DARTH PANDA^duel 05:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

DOF

A nice idea. Have a stroll through my various ramblings on different topics whenever you fancy. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hmm?

Is there any particular reason I'm the target of your message?

It's mostly an observation about how we handle sock puppets. One could view the entire Mantanmoreland case as a gross violation of anonymity. I don't think it is simply because we don't let users' games get in the way of an encyclopedia. Anonymity is a shield to protect editors from real-world harassment, but it is not and should not be a shield from enforcing our modest rules. Cool Hand Luke 01:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: bugzilla help

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=account Cbrown1023 talk 02:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: licensing paranoia

Anyone is free to modify or redistribute Huggle and charge for it. However, doing so wouldn't be much of a business model as it can be downloaded for free. Any patent on Huggle's functionality would obviously be invalidated by prior art -- Gurch (talk) 10:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Listas Parameter

About a week ago you asked Happy-Melon about the listas parameter and were referred to Template talk:WPBannerMeta. Did you find your answer there?

I have been working on resolving the conflicts on the pages that are in the Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts. Almost all of these are caused by misuse of the listas parameter, the DEFAULTSORT template or the different way in which the different project banners handle the listas parameter. Because of the roughly 1,800 conflicts I have resolved, I know a lot more than almost anyone wants to know about the listas parameter.

If you need more information than you found at Template talk:WPBannerMeta, drop a note on my talk page.

JimCubb (talk) 19:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

---

(You rang?)

Okay, here goes.

The listas (pronounced as the two words "List As") parameter determines how a page is sorted in a category listing. It is used to over ride the page name if that is necessary. For most biographical articles it is necessary so that one would not have to look under "G" rather than "B" for George Bush.

It was put in WPBannerMeta when it was thought that no Article would be adopted by more than a couple of projects, three at the most; all the editors who applied the banners would be experts in page name conventions and the people involved wanted DEFAULTSORT to be used only on the Article page. (I remember seing the discussion but I do not remember where.)

Now here is the fun part of the listas parameter. Not all the banner templates use it.

The ones that do use it vary in their reaction to its absence, whether it is not listed or the parameter is set to blank. Most behave properly and simply reset the sort value to the PAGENAME. WPMilHist, WPBiog, most projects of states of the United States and most countries do this. Some countries' project banners, specifically WP Greece, explode if the banner will change the listas parameter that is already set. Look at the talk page for Theodoros Roussopoulos. There are pieces of the WPGR banner spread down the page and some of the pieces are not vecognizable as part of a banner. When you edit the page you can see why it happened. The WPBiog banner has "Roussopoulos, Theodoros" as its listas parameter. Because the parameter is missing in the WPGR banner it is going to set the parameter to the PAGENAME. The pressure was too much for the poor thing. The fix is simple. Copy the listas line from the WP Biog banner and paste it into the WPGR and Journalism banners.

I think that Journalism is one of the many banners that does not particularly care about the listas parameter. Those banners do not use the listas parameter if it is present and they do not complain if it is not there.

There you have it, almost in a nutshell. It may be more than you wanted or needed to know about the listas and it is a lot more than you would have found in a single article or Talk page.

JimCubb (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

IRC

Hi. First you need to connect to the Freenode network (irc.freenode.net). To do that you can either download and use another program (like mIRC) or if you're using Firefox you can use the ChatZilla add-on. The WP:IRC tutorial might help you out a bit more. When you're connected you can join channels using the /join #channel command and type comments into the channel. You type all commands and comments into a box, usually at the bottom of the program's window. Wikipedia IRC channels are listed at WP:IRC. Anything you can type, you can send. You can send a link to an image, but not an image directly into the channel. Information on registering is here. Cloaking process is over here on Meta. If you need anything clarified feel free to ask. Regards, Matt (Talk) 04:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Matt.T's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gaming the System

Blanking a talk page isn't gaming the system. Why don't you read the policies, guidelines, and essays pertaining to this matter. Multiple people use this IP address. You're already familiar with the problems this can pose. So quit this this stupid edit war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.183.171.30 (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the shared IP template up. Whenever anyone looked something up on wikipedia we'd get some weird, irrelevant message. I think I am going to create an account, as that should save a lot of trouble. 216.183.171.30 (talk) 17:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Wikipedia:Life, Universe, and Everything Day"

A page you created, Wikipedia:Life, Universe, and Everything Day, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is nonsense or gibberish.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 01:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Mis-tagging CSDs

The article Hedgewars was userfied after deletion so it could be worked on. Someone who is slightly clueless moved it back into article space, and then you used a inapplicable criteria to try to have it deleted. I know people speed through CSD tagging, but it doesn't help when you get them wrong. Avruch ^T 21:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for any help you can offer me in making the entry I am working on a stronger entry

Hey Ipatrol,

Thanks for the contributions you have made to the page I am working on. Any additions you can make will be welcomed and I would definitely appreciate a discussion. I have been citing newspaper articles as reference sources and local news agency in what is a local initiative. For the record, I am a scientist from New Orleans who follows alternative energy in my home community from afar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neurorocker (talk • contribs) 22:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:Promote

Hello! How does this tag functionally differ from Template:Proposed? If someone wants an essay or other informational page to become a policy or guideline, how is that substantially different from any other proposal that a page become a policy or guideline? —David Levy 18:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

The diffrence between {{proposed}} and {{promote}} is of two things: History and the status afterwards. A proposal page is created to demonstrate a proposal, a page with promote has already existed, usually as an essay or information page. And also after a proposal page fails to gain consensus, {{Failed}} is usually added to the top, basically making the page historical, but for promotion after failure it can simply go back to an essay or information page, as it had been.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand that there are differences between a page created as a proposed guideline/policy and a pre-existing page that someone wants to make a guideline/policy, but these needn't be reflected in the template for the following reasons:

1. This tag is used in conjunction with the page's pre-existing tag ({{essay}}, etc.), so even if {{proposed}} were used instead of {{promote}}, the distinction would remain clear.

2. There's no reason why a pre-existing essay or informational page tagged with {{proposed}} cannot retain its original tag ({{essay}}, etc.) if it fails to become a guideline/policy. In fact, when appropriate, even some pages created as proposed guidelines/policies can be re-tagged as essays or informational pages. It's the application of common sense (not a blind response to the the tag used for the proposal) that determines this. —David Levy 18:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editing policy

Just speaking as a neutral observer* to this debate, I believe you are mistaken in enforcing the "consensus" reached in the section you refer to when reverting the page. Putting something in a fancy archive box and declaring the discussion closed with a consensus does not turn said discussion into a consensus. Upon reading the discussion, I came to a count of 10 people participating, 5 of whom supported the demotion itself. The other 5 were either ambivalent or opposed it. 50% support is not a consensus by any definition of the word. Even if there had been more of a consensus demonstrated by the discussion, several people have come onto the page stating that they were not aware of the discussion and would like to participate. The demotion did not have consensus, and does not have consensus (although it does seem to be swinging towards demotion at present, the discussion is not yet complete.) As it was originally policy, tradition dictate it remain policy until consensus is reached for its demotion. The disputed tag is plenty notice that the page should not be given weight as accepted policy until the discussion is over. Note that the page was reverted to its status as policy once again again recently. I believe it would help everything go a lot smoother if you would leave it as it is, and go to the talk page discussion if you want to continue participating in this debate. Revert wars do not help discussion any.--Dycedarg ж 00:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC) *I realize that I reverted it to policy once. I count myself as neutral because I do not care what the end result is, I care only that consensus is allowed to form naturally, and that the debate is not further hampered by attempts to enforce a false consensus.

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics by country

I have left several notes 1 and 2 about why this page was moved and you have just moved it again, citing only a page that does not exist as the reason given. What is up? - Ahunt (talk) 22:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - I looked everywhere I could for some explanation and didn't find it. I will add the link to the talk page for the redirect. - Ahunt (talk) 22:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cass Community Social Services logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Cass Community Social Services 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Your location

Hello there, I was just checking user pages randomly and I came across your page, You said you live in New Jersey and you never left the Northern and Eastern hemispheres, but New Jersey as well as the rest of the US is on the western hemisphere. Is there a little mistake or some special case? Chadsnook (talk) 14:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Too many photos edits

Aside from the accusation of edit warring for making one justified revert of an edit I found contentious, I have no idea what "use the template properly" means. See Wikipedia talk:Template messages/Cleanup#Standardisation of template styling for discussion of the styling issues; I've left your two images for now, even though they aren't needed, but I expect that if you have any further issues with the current styling you'll make your case on the talk page.

In addition, Your proposed speedy of the category doesn't appear to fit any of the G6 guidelines. I don't mind if Category:Pages with too many photos if taken to CfD, but I've declined the speedy pending an actual rationale, along with re-adding the cat to the template (along with the standard cleanup template category, which you forgot). Again, feel free to take any concerns to the template talk. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I've left a comment on the template talk. This threat isn't going to happen at any rate, as your authorship of the template doesn't give you ownership of it. If there's no productive dissent on the template talk I'll be restoring the previous version. I suggest you have a good read of WP:OWN (and WP:CSD for the category deletion) in the meantime. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

If the discussion has ended, I'm going to restore the original edited version, as I need pages tagged with this template to be properly categorised for my workflow. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Promote improved

Hello! I've merged this into Template:Proposed, carefully retaining the desired differentiation. Transcluding {{promote}} continues to work, and I've expanded the functionality.

Via the "type" parameter, it's now possible to specify what type of page (policy, guideline, etc.) one wants the page to become. Otherwise, "policy or guideline" is displayed.

Via the "status" parameter, one can specify the page's current status. For an essay, type {{proposed|status=essay}} or {{promote|status=essay}}: {{proposed}}

For an informational page, type {{proposed|status=info}} or {{promote|status=info}}: {{proposed}}

Any other parameter will work, displaying whatever you want. For example, {{proposed|status=page of some other type}} or {{promote|status=page of some other type}}: {{proposed}}

Typing {{promote}} on its own sets the status to "essay or informational page": {{promote}}

Also, it's now possible to include shortcuts via unnamed parameters. And it's still possible to link to a specific talk page section with the "section" parameter. —David Levy 02:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

...

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Inline_Templates.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dreil

In removing the 5 day deletion tag from Dreil you left the edit summary "Deletion is not cleanup, merge?" The problem is there's nothing to merge this to as the base subject is non-notable. You'll see that the name of the RPG in question, "Dark Planet, links to an unrelated book about Doctor Who. --Boston (talk) 10:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Heloise

Why did you revert my edit to the intro? I removed a claim that is unsubstantiated anywhere in the article, and left a perfectly intelligle edit summary. --Color me Mauve (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI, Color me Mauve is a sock of a banned user, Herschelkrustofsky.   Will Beback  talk  21:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Guam baseball players

What was wrong with this edit? [3] Borgarde (talk) 12:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Notability (Fiction)

There seems to be some progress being made towards redrafting the guideline. Most of the arguments for a permissive guideline seem to have been countered in the sense that they have been found not to be viable. My attempts to obtain a compromise earlier this year seem to be leading towards a slightly stricter applciation of WP:V for fiction that should discourage topics which are only the subject of in universe plot summary, trivia and cruft. A recent post at WT:FICT#The rules seems to make this clear. Can you provide some cool and clear support towards drafting a compromise that is compliant with existing Wikipedia policies and guidelines? --Gavin Collins (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Iflink

Template:Iflink has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:CSD

Please self revert on WP:CSD. There was consensus for this addition back in late December / early January, and it was listed at WP:UP for the past three months without objection (see WP:SILENCE). Unilateral removal is unhelpful at this point (and definitely doesn't have consensus). See the comments on the talk page and the links to the (now archived) discussions. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

You and the other editors have failed to demonstrate that this change expirenced adiquate community exposure. WP:NOMORE states that silence can mean consent, apathy, or ignorance. There is no evidence of the former here. Please place this discussion on VPP or CENT before implementation. I will not selfrevert and I stand by my edit--Ipatrol (talk) 03:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

It had exposure at WT:CSD, WT:UP and WP:AN (all at the same time and for over a week). This isn't a highly controversial change and it has been performed for the past three months without major objection (at least not that I'm aware of). As I also indicated it was codified at WP:UP for the past three months (also seemingly without objection). It is, at this point, de facto behavior (and there are admins actively deleting pages meeting this criteria at this very moment). Please restore it, and make your objections on WT:CSD (if you indeed object to this criteria) rather than disrupting Wikipedia. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Rio Branco, Uruguay

You have moved the newly created article on the Uruguayan city of Rio Branco to Río Blanco. While this would be the correct Spanish translation for "white river", as explained in the article, the official name of the city is actually "Rio Branco", in Portuguese (not Spanish), because the city was named in honor of a Brazilian diplomat and not an actual river. The city's name is always spelled with an "r", never with an "l", including all Uruguayan official maps and publications (see, for example, the census reference by the Uruguayan National Statistics Institute linked in the article), even though the acute accent on Río (absent in Portuguese, present in Spanish) is often written.

In other words, an Uruguayan city with the name of "Río Blanco" simply does not exist. You can see that the Spanish-language Wikipedia's disambiguation entry for Río Blanco makes no mention to a city in Uruguay, while there is a Spanish article on the city as Río Branco (with the acute accent on Río, but with an "r" in Branco). It should be noted that you didn't change the spelling yourself in the article's body text.

I was in the process of expanding the article, adding an infobox and links to the article in other languages, when I noticed your move. I will refrain from doing so for now, and will not revert your move either, in order to avoid an edit war and so as not to mess up links and redirects even further. But I hope we can reach an agreement on this issue. --UrsoBR (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: please join discussion

I have been invited by user Binksternet (talk) to discuss the matter in the (for now) Río Blanco, Uruguay talk page. I would like to invite you to join us. --UrsoBR (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Reply

I have not logged on to my WP account for a while, I have replied to your posting, just letting you know. Tmtoulouse (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Concern over username FeygeleGoy

I hope you had a good Shabbos, and will be able to read my email, and respond to me about your concern over my username, either on my talk page, or through email. In addition, I believe a review of my contributions would show no vandalism over the time I've been a member of Wikipedia, since August of 2008.
Please let me hear back from you as to whether this alleviates your concerns, or if you need to discuss further. Thank you. FeygeleGoy/פֿײגעלע גױ‎ 00:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Imbox license.svg

Hi Ipatrol. I just noticed that you copied en:File:Imbox license.svg to commons:File:Imbox license (1).svg. However, there already exists an exact copy of that image at the proper name commons:File:Imbox license.svg. So I suggest that you nominate commons:File:Imbox license (1).svg for deletion.

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

DrKiernan

I've reverted your comment at WP:RFC/U (comments do not belong on the main page there). Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DrKiernan where the actual RFC is being conducted. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:55, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging

You've tagged some pages as G6 and it wasn't at all clear how that criterion applied to them. And you tagged some as vandalism which wasn't vandalism. Please can you make sure that the deletion reason meets one of the criteria. Thank you. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:04, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

This was closed by an administrator in the proper fashion. If you have additional concerns then either take it up with the closing admin or take it elsewhere. Ironholds (talk) 15:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

3RR on Template:AFC status/code

Ipatrol, I have no idea why you would violate WP:3RR over a pointless image on a template of a WikiProject that you don't even belong to, but I suggest you revert yourself immediately and stop edit warring. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Bug 17888

Hi
Concerning your comment at bugzilla:17888: Double redirects do currently work, which is why Happy Melon explicitly didn't set it to "enhancement", as per his first comment on the bug! Check for example User:R'n'B/R2.
Also, at the linked WP:VPR discussion there is an example for where a triple redirect is useful, which pops up from time to time. I'm certain there are others too, and I don't think at all they are a bad idea. Why do you?
Amalthea 16:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Your ANI thread

Please don't spam a load of usser talk pages [4] over this. It appears to be more like trying to graner support than anything else, which is not a helpful approach. I understand you feel you have a legitimate grievance but it is not best (or usual) practice to notify people of these threads unless thay have been specifically mentioned within it. Pedro :  Chat  21:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd recomend you stop notifying - it will #.not be well interpreted. Just a friendly bit of advice - feel free to ignore it. Pedro :  Chat  21:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Do it your way as you wish. It was just some advice, and yours to ignore. Pedro :  Chat  21:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Pedro is giving you good advice. I'd recommend following it, if for nothing else, for your own sanity. Don't let this place freak you out so much, it's only a website. Someone called you "young" in an unpleasant way, and you've unfortunately reacted in a quite immature fashion, thus feeding the impression. Read up on forum shopping, follow the advice you are being given, get back to making an encyclopedia. I recommend some cooling off if something like what malleus posted has steamed you enough to prat on as much as you are right now. Relax, enjoy the place! Keeper | 76 02:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

AFC speedy deletion

Why did you tag Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Phyllis Morse for speedy deletion? Redirects left over from moving an AFC article are themselves usually left over (as written in the reviewing instructions, which everyone else seems to have agreed upon). Marking a page as you did, because a page is "holding up a move" is for a title that you intend to move something to, not from, and I assume you simply didn't realize what tag you had placed. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

welcoming new users

Quick word of advice; well, two actually. I note you've been welcoming new users, always good, but remember to check two things; firstly that they've edited, and secondly that their edits have been good. Of the four most recent people you welcomed one hadn't touched a page and another had used his ability to edit as a way of inserting spamlinks. Ironholds (talk) 23:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry make that one new user, one spammer and two vandals. Ironholds (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Looking at more it appears that you've actually been welcoming new users before they've even hit "edit this page". It is highly recommended that you wait until accounts have shown a desire to contribute before saying hi. Ironholds (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Category redirects

Hi. I see that you recently created a series of categories that are all redirected to Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive. As a general matter, category pages should not be (hard) redirects at all, and especially not to other namespaces. I see that none of the category pages you created have any content other than the redirect, nor do any of them have any pages as members. Also, I don't see any consensus developing in favor of your proposal to use the assessment categories for this project. If that were to change, it would be a trivially simple matter to recreate these categories, so I am inclined to delete them, but I wanted to give you a heads-up first in case there is some reason to keep them that I had not considered. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:31, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The redirects are actually to prevent redlinks from appearing in the article banner. As for the banner, there has not been any arguement about it so far. If you oppose, please discuss on ACID's talk page before deleting.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Redlinks don't actually hurt anything. If you think there is a need for these categories to exist, then I would suggest putting some descriptions on them instead of leaving them as redirects. On the other hand, if the categories aren't going to be used, then I don't see the need for them. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Clinique

Can you explain how this adding this "...Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion. The third and final step is to lubricate the skin with a product called Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion, though usually referred to as DDML for short. "

consititutes a neutrality issue? It is verifiable here: http://www.clinique.ca/templates/products/3step_prod.tmpl?CATEGORY_ID=CATEGORY5340

and the section on Charles Revson's Etherea line, which you also reverted, is verifiable here: http://www.andrewtobias.com/fireandice18.html

--99.231.196.195 (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The information you added may not have been exactly an neutrality issue, but it fails some other policies. We can't have instructions, and simple statements of a product are usually defined as advertising. Now, the nature of the rollback| system is that all edits you made in succession are summarily undone. Feel free to re-add information that actually states something like an encyclopedia. By the way, use the preview button to check your edits look good before saving, it is preferable for you to make as few a number of edits as possible, consolidate multiple edits into one.--Ipatrol (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Reversion of spelling correction

Not a big deal, but this was a good edit. You probably misidentified it as a bad edit because the entire paragraph was bad. -kotra (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I haven't heard back from you yet, but if it's not too much trouble, could you strike or remove the warning you placed on their talk page? -kotra (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I still haven't heard back from you, so I went ahead and made a comment on their talk page so the editor will understand we don't chastise editors for constructive edits. Removing or striking your comment would still be preferable (and if you decide to do so, I give you permission to remove my comment as well). -kotra (talk) 05:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

April Fools stuff

Just a note: Wikipedia traditionally does a number of April Fools pranks. So long as it does not harm the integrity of the encyclopedia (no false info, and project pages only) these are perfectly fine. It would actually be more disruptive to prevent such things then to allow it, which I want to ask you to think about before 'closing' these things. We will not let anything get out of hand, and nothing harming the content will ever be permitted. Prodego ^talk 03:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring over this; it will be closed soon enough. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Please stop closing the obvious April Fools stuff, as mentioned above this is a tradition here. As long as it does not harm the integrity of the project it is fine. You closed with notes to discuss. This is the discussion. KnightLago (talk) 04:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimbo Wales

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimbo Wales, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimbo Wales and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimbo Wales during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mr.Z-man 04:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Brittflick 1994

Hi Ipatrol. I think you may not have noticed when you posted the generic template block message, but I had already posted a tailored message for Brittflick 1994‎ informing him of the my one week block and warning him that further copyvios after expiration would likely result in a longer or indefinite block.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DougsTech. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. You have submitted NO EVIDENCE of any kind. Accusing me of being a sockpuppet is a PERSONAL ATTACK and will not be tolerated! DougsTech (talk) 02:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I am one of the admins which DT think there are too many of; I wholly agree with him here that your totally unsubstantiated accusation is disruptive. Please be careful not to risk being blocked yourself. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 13:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

DougsTech sockpuppet investigation

Have you forgotten about the request for evidence that DougsTech is a sockpuppet? If you have none, please say so, so that this case can be closed. Timmeh! 17:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I dont think this is much to go one, but the user did say that hes familliar with creating new accounts to get privileges back...might be worth your time in digging here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Denied/January_2009#User:DougsTech

69.157.53.22 (talk) 18:15, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

ACC

Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Prodego ^talk 18:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

DougsTech sockpuppetry allegation

Please do not add the {{sockpuppet}} tag to any user page unless and until such times as a user is confirmed to have used sockpuppets in a manner that falls outwith that prescribed by policy. I'm somewhat concerned that requests that you provide evidence have gone unheeded, and I'm very concerned that you added the tag to Dougs userpage and then appear to have gone offline, something of a hit and run. Perhaps you're not entirely comfortable with the entire sockpuppetry system, that's understandable, but being suspicious of a user isn't enough, we have millions of editors, thousands who edit regularly, so it's inevitable that some users will behave like other users. That's without taking into account users coming and going, forgetting passwords and so on, so it's quite possible many users will be suspicious but are entirely innocent.

If you can provide evidence, please feel free to do so, though I would strongly recommend you speak to an administrator first so they can double check you're submitting the types of evidence checkusers work on. If you're unable to provide evidence, I strongly recommend you withdraw the RFCU report and apologise to Dougs. Finally, sockpuppets always slip up, if there's genuinely a problem, someone will spot the connection, don't worry if you can't. Nick (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Reversion complaint

Why are you reverting my edit? I am just informing him of the fact that he has been vandalized 10 times, even though on his page it only says 9 times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msolisone (talk • contribs) 21:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Do not make edits to others' user pages without asking unless they explicitly allow editing of their user page, just a courtesy.--Ipatrol (talk) 21:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it really that big of a deal? Its kind of funny, doesn't hurt anyone, and its telling the truth. About not making edits to other peoples pages: if someone wrote on their page that the Holocaust didn't happen, are you saying you would not be allowed to edit that out? Msolisone (talk) 21:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

In other words, yes, unless they jut put it up there to tick people off. Humor is something that we constrain only to certain pages. "Truth" is not a reason either, people can lie on their own user pages (just not in articles). And please post new comments at the bottom of my page if you ever convince the administrators to unblock your account.--Ipatrol (talk) 21:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

Ipatrol, thanks much for the pleasant surprise. -- Fuzheado | Talk 05:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

New Jersey County Colleges

 Not done If you could find a nice image for New Jersey County Colleges, it would be appreciated. The Infobox doesn't really apply and should probably be replaced by an image. MBisanz ^talk 08:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, the author cannot find the images and was a bit apprehensive about allowing the work in any kind of derivative as the author is afraid of uses that don't reflect positively.--Ipatrol (talk) 19:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahh ok, I understand, thanks for looking. MBisanz ^talk 20:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:AN

[5]. Sorry, slipped on my watchlist--Jac16888^Talk 20:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MZMcBride 2

The user reverted himself, which is allowed. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

WT:Articles for creation/Ben Robertson

Earlier today, I set the AFC proposal of WT:Articles for creation/Ben Robertson to hold with a comment of "needs 3rd party sources." A little over 2 hours later, you set it to declined, with a comment of "I can't even find the cited book exists." I've set it back to hold, as I didn't have any trouble finding evidence of the book:

• WorldCat
• Google Book Search
• Google Scholar
• Amazon

I'm not sure what the hurry was (we usually give people 24 hours to add sources) to decline the proposal, but the book absolutely does exist. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ernest Cooper

I set this to hold yesterday, and later that day you declined it. My understanding is that holds are supposed to be allowed to stand for at least 24 hours, before you change it to a decline, so I have put it back to hold. The editor has expressed a wish to improve it on my talk page, so let's give him/her a chance to do so, okay? Thanks, Raven1977^{Talk to me}_{My edits} 16:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

• I also put Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nicole Alexander back to hold, for the same reason. Raven1977^{Talk to me}_{My edits} 16:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

GAHHHHH!!!!

		The Original Barnstar
		You keep beating me at reverting vandalism! --Abce2 (talk) 22:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editnotice/subpage

Hi
Do you remember what you intended Wikipedia:Editnotice/subpage be used for?
Amalthea 14:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

If you don't, would you mind if it got deleted again? It doesn't seem to have a purpose at the moment.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Signpost

Wonderful! As I mentioned in the call for writers, the main thing we need right now is people to contribute to the discussion report: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-05-25/Discussion report. See earlier reports for examples of how it can be done, although doing it differently would be fine. Another upcoming story that you might right will be the official results of the Commons Picture of the Year contest. It's over, but the official results haven't been announced yet; when they are, it'd be nice to have a story on that. And piecemeal contributions to "News and notes" and "In the news" are also always appreciated (drafts for those are usually linked from the planning room). Thanks!--ragesoss (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Simplify policy RfC

FYI, I am drafting an RfC at the above page. If you would like to add your own statement, or indicate your support for an existing statement, please feel free to do so now. I would also strongly recommend that we avoid replying to other statements, since we would be likely to repeat what was already said on the CSD talk page, and that we should try to keep the background/proposal/objections section as concise as possible; we should not begin to pack these sections, but we should leave that for our own statements. Once we have some more contributions here, I'll see about posting it to the relevant noticeboards. Thanks! --Ryan Delaney ^talk 21:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

About User:82.148.97.69

Would you please copy a notice you made on User:82.148.97.69 to User Talk:82.148.97.69. I would do it myself but I want to make it crystal clear that they are your words and not mine.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Reason? I think that that would be redundant to the red box already there. I just put it there because all the headers were moved to user subpages and policy requires a base page for them.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I am planing to redirect User:82.148.97.69 to User Talk:82.148.97.69. with this in mind would you need to copy the notice because of the policy you mentioned?--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why you would need to do that. Discuss this on User talk:82.148.97.69/header.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

By "this" do you mean the redirecting or the copying?--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect, take this discussion to the page I mentioned.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at User talk:82.148.97.69/header.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Signpost tech report

See my note here. If you want to cover the bug (and anything else) in the report, that would be helpful. And/or if you want to do a special report/article for this week or in future weeks on the bug or any other tech topic, that would be welcome. --Aude (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The deadline for this week's edition is coming up fast.--ragesoss (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not wrong

I read the book, there is mention of McCunn. --76.200.237.173 (talk) 01:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Rawtenstall bus station

Ipatrol, this page should be on as a it is a bus station in England. It may not be the biggest or the best but it deserves an entry as it part of a project to include all the country's bus stations.

Will link it to other sites will, do more research add more bulk to this site is there is an importance to it.

Thank you very much.

--Whohe! (talk) 09:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Muntu Valdo Page Marked for Deletion

In reference to the Muntu Valdo page that I have created and you marked for deletion, It is not very clear to me why you have marked it for deletion, Could you please explain this to me and how I can improve the page? I have searched for A7 qualifier and not sure what it means.

I would like to be an active member of the Wiki project and would be good to understand how things work in order to keep in with the rules.

Thanks

--KevinKieran! (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.202.4 (talk)

Speedy deletions

Please be a lot more careful in regards to speedy deletions - articles like this are obviously not deletion candidates. Have a thorough readthrough of WP:CSD, and try and apply it properly when tagging articles. Ironholds (talk) 03:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Update on Basex page

lpatrol, thanks to your guidance (and thanks for your guidance as well), I did a lot of additional research and have made updates - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basex Would appreciate your feedback when you have a moment on the history and criticism sections. Thanks! --Mworth (talk) 01:13, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

lpatrol, please see comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basex - someone undid your edit (a user only identified by IP number) --Mworth (talk) 14:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Talk:Basex.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mworth (talk) 19:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Muntu Valdo

I have amended the lead text on the article, could you please let me know if there is still a problem? Thanks

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Talk:KevinKieran.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--User:KevinKieran (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Template:Disputed

I just now saw here that you reverted my edit. Thanks a mile for telling me! What was the problem? This should have worked. Debresser (talk) 22:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I restored my edit and checked. All is working fine. Where did you see it break? Debresser (talk) 22:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Your edits destroyed the categories that the template uses and replaced several parameters with an incomprehendable "DMCA" parameter. Please explain this edit in more detail you provided in your edit summary. --Ipatrol (talk) 01:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The mysterious {{DMCA}} template does precisely that: bestow categories in the best way possible. It works with dated and undated categories alike, as well as with all-inclusive categories. On top of that, it can even make an error message if an invalid date parameter is feed into it. It completely fulfills the function of the previous code and even supersedes it. And its short and elegant. I hope this puts your mind to ease. Debresser (talk) 08:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

not vandalism

please stop reverting without explanation and calling edits vandalism. I have removed irrelevant content, formatted and made corrections. If you disagree with something go to talk and discuss it please. Otherwise your edits constitute clear vandalism of reverting to grammatically incorrect and also irrelevant content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahin Giray (talk • contribs) 23:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

deletion

173.20.21.183 keeps deleting info on the transformers pages and wont stop ive warned him but dont want to get into an edit war could you help? thanks! Baller449 (talk) 01:04, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Arcadia davida

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. NW (Talk) 19:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:CSD

Hi, would you mind reverting your revert of ZabMilenko's revert? I made a change that I believed to be non-controversial, but since it turned out to be, the original should be restored. Thanks, decltype (talk) 07:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Infobox type use

Template:Infobox type use has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Huggle

Re this, Huggle lite no longer works as a result of the recent MediaWiki updates. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, just wanted an explanation.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

WikipediaForum

I saw that rather hard to miss WikipediaForum request... What on Earth is WikipediaForum? Is it something like Wikipedia Review, or is it something totally different? Because it's quite really caught my interest... UntilItSleeps ^{Public PC} 17:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

There's probably no need to go around tagging images for deletion once they've been in the orphaned fair use (or similar) category for seven days. The category summaries at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion allow admins to see deletable images that way. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages at commons:User talk:Ipatrol.

Thought I'd leave you a note here since you soft redirected your page. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Update on Basex page

Ipatrol, based on your additional suggestions, I reworked the sections you pointed out and I believe it now does not read at all like an advert - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basex Would appreciate your feedback - perhaps we can remove the header notice at this point?

Hello, Ipatrol. You have new messages at Talk:Basex.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mworth (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hipatrol,

can you perhaps figure out what's wrong with the font in the first paragraph of Arora-Ahluwalia? There's a different font and I think those non-Arabic letters require a template, but I don't know. (I'm asking you because I saw [6]--and it might be good to keep an eye out on that page.) Thanks! Drmies (talk) 19:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Note on the RfC

I would appreciate it if you did not, in future, actively try to involve me in your activities in any way. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for the input.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

• It takes good judgment and humility to course correct. Impressive. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Would that more Wikipedians were willing to fess up to the occasional blunder. Kudos for the exemplary testicular fortitude. Writegeist (talk) 18:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

August 2009

Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on others' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence, as you did at User talk:Jeni. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Jeni ^(talk) 21:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Template:TOMP

I have nominated Template:TOMP (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Magioladitis (talk) 00:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1