User talk:Kjmonkey

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


Hello, Kjmonkey! 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 using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking Insert-signature.png if shown; 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! The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 01:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles

Your GA nomination of Norhill, Houston[edit]

The article Norhill, Houston you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol unsupport vote.svg; see Talk:Norhill, Houston for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 01:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cristiana Dumitrache[edit]

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

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

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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Cind.amuse 15:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paul Rafaelovich Amnuel[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Paul Rafaelovich Amnuel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

We don't do cross-wiki redirects, do we?

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

After a cursory glance, there's no policy agaist "cross-wiki" redirects that I can find. Perhaps you were thinking "cross-namespace" redirects? Referring to WP:CNR, the argument for deleting such redirects is because "Namespaces were created for a reason, so that the encyclopedic content would be separate. CNRs work against this." First just to clarify, by "cross-wiki" we mean from one language-specific wiki to another. In all language-specific wikis, the encyclopedic content is in the main namespace. When redirects point from one language-specific main namespace to a different language-specific main namespace, the redirection can still be said to reside in the same main (encyclopedic content) namespace. In this particular case, en:Paul Rafaelovich Amnuel is redirected to ru:Амнуэль, Павел Рафаэлович which are on the same main namespace. The primary reason for the redirect from the english to the russian wiki is because there is a well constructed article in russian and no article in english. The secondary reason for the redirect is because there are categories for the article in the english wiki that would have pointed to an otherwise redlink english article name. If the redirect either aids searches on certain terms or someone finds them useful WP:RFD#KEEP, then the redirect should stay. Again, in this particular case since there is no english article for the search term "Paul Rafaelovich Amnuel" and an average english-speaking user would not likely search using the russian "Амнуэль, Павел Рафаэлович," we can presume such a redirect under the english term in lieu of a redlink would "aid searches" on those particular terms especially if the topic is proper in the russian wiki. Additionally, the presence of a redirect that goes to the analogous article in a different language wiki would be "useful" to a future editor of the english article where reliable citations or wiki commons resources may be found where a redlink and a blank page lends no such help.
If you feel the redirect is still inappropriate or should be deleted, then you can escalate the issue to WP:RFD. Since I do believe that the redirect is appropriate, I will remove the proposed deletion from the article main namespace and copy it to the discussion page for reference.Kjmonkey (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paul Rafaelovich Amnuél[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Paul Rafaelovich Amnuél has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. je deckertalk 23:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Your Revision, is completely erroneous: A matter for good Wiki Editors, w/ good intentions not the F.E.C.[edit]

quote of current revert done by Kansan: "In the U.S. House of Representatives, only Paul and Dennis Kucinich voted against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution, which asks the United Nations to charge Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating its genocide convention and charter" -- 1st in that voting against a resolution is not a position - positions are positives that other may adopt or advance in the form of a resolution that may be voted on - there is a difference, I think you vote on laws or resolutions, not positions -- 2nd two people voting is not a position, negative association w/ Dennis Kucinich are placed intentionally to influence the reader with your POV, not NPOV -- 3rd The UN is a governmental body that deals with relations between Nation States, it does not charge leader of Nations at all but the Nations themselves. -- 4th In this case there is clouding of the issue with the name of the president of Iran and alluding that Paul supports the president of Iran as a POSITION -- 5th The inclusion of the Vote against the Resolution does not contain the word GENOCIDE, GENOCIDE was place there INTENTIONALLY to poison a persons thoughts on a candidate for the Office of President, for our United States - again not accurate and not NPOV, actually worse, Similar to distortion I noted in the Medved show today, which we cleared up w/ the posting of the GOP Resignation letter w/ that was deleted by Kansan, then reposted here is the Resolution, notice no Genocide, and no Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- H. Res. 175: Condemning the Government of Iran for its state-sponsored persecution of its Baha'i minority and --

You have been notified before and after you made this change, . Tikkun Olam & CheersSnettie 19:22, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

"Your Revision, is completely erroneous." I don't know why this title should be on my talk page. If you are trying to persuade me to intervene by engaging in reverting edits of other editors, I afraid I cannot entertain your requests. Wiki editing is a hobby for me; I have work outside Wiki editing. I must point out that your recent edits on Ron Paul with regard to poor grammar, disregard of wiki policies or lack of inspection before posting has consumed time to address that I could have used to do other productive work. I recommend that you engage discussion pages if you notice an edit that should be reverted or edited so that a consensus can be made if its cause is proper. I am sure I have maintained WP:NPOV in my edits and taken due diligence with regards to my application of the wiki policies. Kjmonkey (talk) 21:34, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Peter Schiff Article[edit]

Hello KJ. I left a comment regarding your recent edits on the Peter Schiff talk page. Please have a look. Thank you.'''SPECIFICO''' (talk) 13:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Members of the Yamaneko Group of Comet Observers has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Members of the Yamaneko Group of Comet Observers, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. 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. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:31, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Kjmonkey. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)