User talk:PRehse

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


I really need help on DisneyCarToys page please?[edit]

I really need your help, I started the DisneyCarToys page but it needs to be improved, will improve this page please?

Here are links to help: WiseBen (talk) 14:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, PRehse![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


So what happens next? The only thing I can interpret from such an ambiguous 'non-conclusion' is that articles created without flags should stay that way, whereas articles originally created with flags should have them included/reinstated? The sovereign state issue (UK/ENG/SCO/WAL/NI) was also left unsettled. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate I would just let it be. Eventually the MOS you put in place will become definitive. Right now if you force the issue you will just get disruption with no conclusion.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Wilfred Hoare[edit]

Could I please ask you to review this article again. I was about half way through when you reviewed it the first time. Many thanks.Gomach (talk) 18:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Getting too old[edit]

I think I'm getting too old to edit WP. The number of new editors coming on and making ILIKEIT arguments is getting to me, as is the two IPs who keep wanting to create their own MMA notability criteria. Even the boxing articles are being subjected to editors creating their own notability standards. Papaursa (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Papaursa We all are - but be careful on your assumptions. That IP might be older than you.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Possible, but I doubt there are too many Wikipedians older than I (especially concerning MMA). I remember how proud my university was that they had both an analog and digital computer. My college days predate calculators and I remember programming a computer by manually flipping digital switches. Feel free to comment at the MMA discussions (as well as the boxing and MMA ones at WT:NSPORT). Papaursa (talk) 10:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Papaursa And I remember dropping my stack of programming cards and feeling the world had ended. Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Shi-Jutsu[edit]

Hello PRehse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Shi-Jutsu, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: article deleted, so A10 no longer applies, Draft should remain in case it can be improved. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Invader notability[edit]

Why do you doubt the notability of Invader? It's been reviewed by Leonard Maltin and the New York Times. --Serpinium (talk) 09:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

thanks but[edit]

Hello. I thanked you at Daniel Straus (Disambiguation) - because I thought you had seen it was a letter case D - but you want to move Daniel Straus to that title. Daniel Straus should be moved to Daniel Straus (disambiguation)... Have a nice day Christian75 (talk) 09:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Christian75 - the situation was confused - hopefully I sorted it out.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
It looks fine, and thansk. And I learned the template db-same. :-) Christian75 (talk) 10:01, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

MOS: title ordering[edit]

Thought I'd ask you for an opinion on a complex format issue rather than disrupt the lull at Talk:WikiProject Boxing. I've hit a stumbling block regarding the order of titles, which affects three different sections—lead (thereby Professional career as well), Professional boxing record, and Titles in boxing. I cannot decide as to how the main four world titles should be listed, in the case of two or more. There are three solutions, but all come with their own snags:

  • Alphabetical order – IBF, WBA, WBC, WBO. I don't see much wrong with this, and it seems like a neutral solution.
  • Establishment order – WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO. This also looks fine to me, and makes just as much sense as alphabetical, but I've seen the occasional editor (especially those with an agenda against a particular sanctioning body) object to it.
  • Chronological achievement order – This seems like the most neutral solution, but I have seen editors who don't like having the WBO in front of "the original three". Also, if two or more sanctioning body titles are won in the same fight, how should they be ordered? That's where this option falls apart completely.

Then there is the issue of The Ring and lineal titles. I believe quite firmly that, since they are not world title sanctioning bodies, they should go last in any list form, in The Ring/lineal order. As for the IBO, since that is not a "big four" world title, it should go after them, but before The Ring/lineal. Finally, there is the European, Commonwealth and British titles. To me, chronological order of achievement makes the most sense for those, along with the world titles. Thoughts? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:46, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate Shrug. I don't think it is worth putting down at least in the foreseeable future. As I said before it is best to let what we have settle and although you don't think there is room for contention there will always be people that make a small thing huge.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Alrighty, but for the record I am strongly leaning towards sanctioning body establishment order (i.e. WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO, IBO) for when it later gets added to the MOS. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

sockpuppet again?[edit]

I can't remember the name... A couple of weeks ago, a sockpuppet was creating minor Japanese wrestling articles and they were blocked. WrestlingPS456 came online today with Japanese wrestling articles. I noticed them because they are doing the exact same wrong thing that brought me to the previous sockpuppet's new articles. You know more about the puppet than I do. Bgwhite (talk) 05:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes Bgwhite its another manifestation - not sure how to deal with him. Those articles will probably be tagged for deletion because the original (master sock) was banned. For the last rounds I was relying on User:Ribbon Salminen and sure enough he Db-G5'd them.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

World Junior Wrestling Championships[edit]

delet it is mistake. what delet? world hunior is important and many articles abouts exist in wikipedia. thanks. please remove deletition

i add source for "Asian Zurkhaneh Sports Championship" and please remove deletation. why delet? i dont know! what problem?please remove deletition — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllFutsal (talkcontribs)

mohsen 1248[edit]

a "mentally sick" user is :mohsen 1248 delet articles because Private complex. help me Asian Sambo Championships: copy text is delet but mentally sick" user mohsen 1248, is writing This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a copyright infringement — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhang-shiwang (talkcontribs) 17:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit summaries for proposed deletions[edit]

Hello. I noticed that you have proposed articles for deletion without saying so in the edit summaries. Example: Wáng Xī' An. Per WP:PROD, "Make sure to provide an edit summary that clearly indicates that the article has been proposed for deletion." A simple "PROD" or "BLPPROD" is sufficient. That makes it easier to check whether PROD was previously contested. Thank you for your contributions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Working Wikipedian's Barnstar[edit]

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Hard Worker's Barnstar
Thank you for improving the formatting of references on Sari Squad and several other articles. zazpot (talk) 21:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Page For Deletion - Rany Saadeh[edit]

Hi Peter, I've noticed you are trying to delete one of my athlete's newly created pages.

Is it really up to you to determine if they are notable enough to deserve a Wiki page? Saying that "they haven't fought in top tier fights" just because you are not familiar with the biggest MMA organization in the UK of which he is a champion? You may have good knowledge of Aikido, but please try stay out of MMA where you are just a fan with a personal opinion.

Notability requirements for MMA (see WP:NMMA is pretty clear with top tier well defined. In this case I just agreed with a nominator on policy. As for staying out of MMA articles - you really should familiarise yourself with what Wikipedia actually is. Lack of Conflict of Interest is encouraged.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Sam Crossed[edit]

I am friends with the professional boxer that this page was created about. Why would you take away the American flag next to his nationality and delete the external links to his Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter page? Other boxers have those on their pages including another boxer I am friends with and created a page for Dusty Hernanez-Harrison, and Sam wanted the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wbballplayer13 (talkcontribs) 15:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wbballplayer13 I usually do a running clean-up on newly created boxing articles and that means I sometimes don't put much information in the edit summaries. For the flags see WP:FLAGICON and external links see WP:EL. More specifically on the Boxing Project page there is a Manual of Style. This is extra information which should not be included - just because some other articles do only means that they should also be changed.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Notability Harold Rogelio Laranang Sr.[edit]

I am trying to understand what constitutes notability by Wikipedia standards. Is it the number of schools an instructor opens? How many people his/her style of martial arts has influenced?

The reason for the page was for his students to be able to find information about the man that dedicated his life to the US Military and Martial Arts. I have research papers with discussion from instructors and family members that studied under the man. The page was built based of of some of that information.

I am not going to try and re-create the page but at least I would like to know in more detail what standards need to be met that way I do not go through this again.

Thanks Sutherlandtkd (talk) 21:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC) Sutherlandtkd (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


Peter, I thought I'd give you and Mdtemp a heads-up that I will be taking a wikibreak until April. Actually, I'm taking a tech break--no phones, no computers, etc. It will be interesting to see how that goes. Anyway, I wanted to let you know that I won't be around to (normally) support you guys in any contentious AfD discussions. Papaursa (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Papaursa sounds like a great idea. Enjoy to peace.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:33, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Notability Criteria for boxers[edit]

Following discussion with you have been engaged in, I have put forward an amendment to the Notability Criteria for boxers which is up for discussion Here. Your in put would be greatly welcomed. --Donniediamond (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Camille Hyde[edit]

Thank you for creating the talk page at Camille Hyde. I have redirected this article. Will the talk page be deleted? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Magnolia677 No just changed to Redirect class. I noticed the article was deleted a year ago.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I expanded that article yesterday, but looked at it again and don't feel it needs it's own article. Her biography is well done at List of Power Rangers Dino Charge characters. I don't do a lot of redirects. Would you mind making the changes? Also, I'm not sure how to redirect to the correct section in the target article. Thanks a lot! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:40, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Magnolia677 Probably why it was deleted previously. I took care of the Redirect details.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Another editor re-created the article and I didn't catch the previous AfD until I went to create the talk page. Thanks again. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)


Could you take a look at Zuluzinho? I believe it should be AfDed, but I think someone with more expertise in the field should look at it. By the way, I'm going to notify X4n6 of this query, as the article was largely created by the Bergman SPA sock farm. Also take a look at Michael J. Heming, which I'm less concerned about, but which is unclear regarding amateur vs. pro and other notability issues. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 07:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Softlavender Zuluzinho meets notability standards but I am less sure about Michael J. Heming. I would let them both be.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I think they're both vanity articles. Virtually no sources for Heming (an IMDB bio?) and nothing I found in a quick search to verify any of his "titles." Also nothing notable about Zuluzinho's record. Just a penchant by someone to have his fight videos plastered all over the net. I'm guessing any local "notability" derives from his father, or his weight - and either of those is more novelty than notability. I'd be curious to know which standard Peter Rehse believes he meets. IMO, I'd support deletion of both if you nom. X4n6 (talk) 09:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I see now that Zuluzinho has fought in at least four PRIDE tournaments, which are top-tier WP:MMA tournaments as defined by WP:MMATIER, so he does meet WP:NMMA. -- Softlavender (talk) 09:53, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I saw PRIDE too, but didn't check WP:MMATIER. Just knew it was a defunct org. Notable. So if you verify Heming's championships, maybe he's notable too. X4n6 (talk) 10:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
  • The facts are not checking out so far on Michael J. Heming. Even the location of the European Karate Championships tournament is wrong -- it wasn't in Brussels in either 1979 or 1980. The whole article looks suspect. Also, retired due to illness aged 22, died age 23, so doubtful in my eyes he could have achieved notability (but maybe that's my skewed opinion on age). Softlavender (talk) 10:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC): edited 10:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I AfDed Michael J. Heming. Thanks all. Softlavender (talk) 11:20, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Talk:Kanchan Kamble.
Message added 12:50, 26 March 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Whpq (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Page "Chua Yeow Kee" Please do not remove.[edit]

Hi Peter Rehse, I have edited and improved my page on "Chua Yeow Kee" by adding more citations, links and references so please do not remove it. I would like to state that I am a student under the subject "Chua Yeow Kee" himself and I provide Information directly from him. I ask that you be reasonable because I might be unable to locate more online resources for links and references as most articles relating to Chua Yeow Kee are not online, as for example, Newspaper articles on Chua Yeow Kee are posted as pictures on our website Please message me directly so I know what more would be necessary for the page. Many Thanks Daniel Goh 99gohdaniel (talk) 07:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Paul Mormando[edit]

I'm back. What do you think of this person's notability? He doesn't appear to be notable as a martial artist and I'm not sure about his acting career (leaning no, but open to convincing). I don't think the listed references make a good case for meeting WP:GNG. A month away from the news, internet, TV, etc. turned out to be quite enjoyable and refreshing. Papaursa (talk) 02:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Papaursa Welcome back - Lots of hyperbole not a lot of support. Reads like a promo piece. I don't think it merits an article.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Papaursa I am also looking at this one - Silvio Simac. A recent PROD was declined because of his British championships but I remain unconvinced.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:26, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
The lack of any reliable sources is definitely a problem. Papaursa (talk) 02:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Papaursa AfD'd.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Shōrin-ryū may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {{Nihongo|'''Shōrin-ryū''' (少林流)<ref name="bishop1">{{cite book | isbn=0-8048-3205-6 | title=Okinawan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

MacLaine Nelson[edit]

  • "Maclain Nelson (born 17 June 1976) is an English actor who is best known for playing.[clarification needed]". It would be very helpful if you finished the sentence. You have made numerous edits but never once sought to finish it. Postcard Cathy (talk) 13:06, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Postcard Cathy I think that is up to the person who first wrote the sentence - I personally have no idea what he is best known for. I suggested this article be deleted for that reason.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:12, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
this is a collaborative effort.

Chan Wui-ngai[edit]

Okay it is possible the page Chan Wui-ngai is done by a sockpuppet-as I was going to move it to Billy Chan Wui-ngai as that looks like its the guys name and then it said the page was protected-so I go look and that page was made by some sockpuppet it looks like! Wgolf (talk) 00:17, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Wgolf You are probably right.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:35, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

PNG removal[edit]

the png is my own work , please explain removal, its from a creative commons license wikimapia ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommy animator (talkcontribs) 15:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Tommy animator I had nothing to do with that - but take a look at the explanation in the edit history. It looks like you used google maps as the base of the image.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

thank you for your quick reply, the image used was from wikimapia satellite(not google), I changed the image to a standard one and tried again. I have also messaged the wikimedia site user. I think the satellite image looked better. animation is taking the whole day and will be ready by tomorrow. thnaks again for your input. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommy animator (talkcontribs) 16:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Antonio Brancalion[edit]

I also saw the absence of any meaningful articles in What links here, but I did specifically link to him via Nathan Cleverly, Jürgen Brähmer and Stipe Drews. Plus, shouldn't the categories count as well? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Mac Dreamstate:No Categories don't count and neither do redirects - only articles. I personally think Lists shouldn't count either but they do. Anyway I found the other links - just curious about the database.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:44, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Tae Kwon Do Life Magazine[edit]

With all due respect I feel that the comments that it read like a Press Release were not warranted. It provided the outline, without advocacy or promotion, of the facts surrounding the release of a new, international print publication. The article cross referenced and linked to notable partner that have endorsed the publication that already exist in Wikipedia.ALLNP 21:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALLNP (talkcontribs)

Thanks so much on the tag correction for Hit girls.... I hope to learn more from you as i still face a little difficulty finding the right tag for Speedy Deletion. Historywiki11 (talk) 12:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Mixed martial arts[edit]

Hey Peter,
your edits on several category talk pages don't seem all too helpful. Template:WikiProject Mixed martial arts is supposed to automatically detect that it is placed on a category talk page, so there's no point in manually adding "|class=Category", even less so for other projects' badges. Rather Template:WikiProject Mixed martial arts needs to be fixed. If lacking resources, I would suggest turning the whole project into a MMA task force as part of WP:WikiProject Martial arts, see for example the Kickboxing task force.
Regards, PanchoS (talk) 09:02, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes but it wasn't doing that mainly because of changes to the category expansion done by someone else. All the changes I did were for articles showing up as unassigned. A manual tag does no harm.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Feedback wanted please[edit]

Hey As you seem to be a regular contributor to kickboxing in wikipedia and/or the kickboxing task force I'd appreciate your thoughts of Kunlun Fight at the link below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadessKB (talkcontribs) 16:42, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:A1b2d3.81[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg User talk:A1b2d3.81, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:A1b2d3.81 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:A1b2d3.81 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. -- samtar talk or stalk 15:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Del Wilkes[edit]

First I'd like to introduce myself My name is Chris Williams and I am Del's webmaster for his Official Website Del was an all american 1984 he was a starter offensive guard for the gamecocks. For reference (Gamecocks All Time Roster) You will find the information on there. The numbers are listed in order Del was #62.

Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction on the reference link.That was my mistake, I thought I had set it an internal, clearly I did not. Thanks again.

Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 20:41, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@WarMachineWildThing:No sweat - just a little drive by editing.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)


Yo, thanks for helping me out in the Ultraman pages. They were lag behind in 2014 due to low percentage of fans lately... Zero stylinx (talk) 11:45, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Betül Kahraman[edit]

Hi! May I kindly ask you about your rational to add WP:USA to the talk page:Betül Kahraman? This is not supported in the article. Thanks. CeeGee 07:56, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

@CeeGee: Mistake - fixed.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:04, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

FYI: Dutch / Netherlands[edit]

Hello. You tagged Peter Müllenberg with WP Denmark, but he is Dutch (not Danish) e.g. from the Netherlands. Just for your infomation (I have fixed it)  :-) Christian75 (talk) 12:11, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Contesting speedy deletion[edit]

Anyone other than the author of an article is entitled to remove a speedy deletion tag, so please revert this edit. (talk) 21:58, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

EPBC deletion[edit]

I done some edits to it now. Please tell me what you think Eurasia Pacific Boxing Council. sorry i always forget to timestamp --Bennyaha (talk) 23:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dawg Fight, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page No holds barred (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) 09:39, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Anthony Taylor[edit]

I wrote an article about Anthony Taylor a boxing ages ago which was deleted due to not being notable I just found out Taylor will be fighting for the WBO Oriental title Win, lose or draw does he become notable now? or does he have to win the title? WP:NBOX sorry i always forget to timestamp --Bennyaha (talk) 23:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


I created the cat b/c because some folks who are interested in that were building laundry lists of related articles in See also sections. Some of them included martial arts. I just mechanically built the category and removed the laundry lists. That is where that is coming from; am fine with removals. Jytdog (talk) 07:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Jytdog I understand how that works. I felt that there was a bit of a stretch to call various martial arts as a form of somatics. I will trim a few more.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Boxing MOS[edit]

Greetings. It's June, six months on from the 'final call' RfC, and a year from the very first proposal (at least where weight classes were concerned). How would we go about getting the whole thing finalised? Only flagicons remain unresolved, as well as top-level location ("England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland, [UK]", etc.) I haven't been facing much opposition since I stopped overhauling existing records—rather, more so helpful feedback and general consensus on most of it. It's definitely time to set it in stone. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:02, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate Agreed - please go ahead.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Not sure if it needs to be an RfC, or just let the yay/nae votes trickle in for some time. When it comes to the flags, I might try to invoke MOS:SPORTFLAGS and WP:WORDPRECEDENCE and see if WP's own guidelines can come to the rescue. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Mac Dreamstate I see what you mean. Leave the flag issue alone for now - as you say let them trickle in. I think it is a good idea to have all the rest develop some history so that when the flag issue (which does not have to be resolved right away ) gets raised again it does not drag everything else with it. Just yesterday I had my edits reverted against MOS - so I want something rather than more waiting. It is strange (and a little scary) that I was just thinking about it when your message came through.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Thomas Alexander Murphy[edit]

I updated the associated talk page to reflect that this person is not living - he is in category "Year of death missing" which does not display. --Big_iron (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment at an AFD[edit]

Hi, I would like to ask you to take a second look at your edit at this AFD. The last line of text that you added looks unintentional. Perhaps you would like to edit or remove it? AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Todd Dunphy[edit]

Do you think he's notable? I think it depends on those world championship claims. I'm not familiar with that organization, are you? The rest is just rank and hall of fame puffery. The Santa Cruz article seems like a valid source but it's the only one.Mdtemp (talk)

Mdtemp Not at all. There is a lot wrong with the article also - not to mention cringing over the referenced sentinel article (kata is not a martial art). The competitions are not important and are classic so many divisions that they become meaningless - the sentinel reference at least hints at that issue. Anyway - it was on my list to eventually add to AfD, that and the repost for Sam Crossed which I see you got. I was kind of hoping someone else would do the honors.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I'll put this one up for AfD.Mdtemp (talk) 17:06, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
What's with the new Combat Hopak article? It was just deleted at AfD and yet has a history going back 5 years. Is it really more notable than it was a week ago? It looks like the Vanilla Gorilla's (nice nickname) article has a fan (something you'd expect from the article's author).Mdtemp (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Mdtemp Combat Hopak came to my attention because they were link bombing in everywhere and the article itself only had a link to its web site. It still is in the Martial arts timeline as a significant event in martial arts - not. I don't think they are that notable even now but the new version at least makes a better case. If you watch some of there videos I can guarantee you it is a poor taekwondo nationalist made up - but the question is - is it notable? With respect to the Vanilla Gorilla (cool but not unique) definately a fan boy but I akos think, based on his other articles, is an attempt to push a stable.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:09, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

NPP / AfC[edit]

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Raymond Weaver[edit]

Hi PRehse;

Thanks for your edits at Raymond Weaver in February, and for adding the Project Banners here. I wonder, though, if "start" is too low ("quite incomplete..... might or might not cite adequate reliable sources."), and might possibly be "B" ("The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.") Since I did much of the work on it, I'd be glad to hear suggestions about what is missing or if there are major problems. Cheers in any case, ch (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

ch The article looks good - I don't really put much importance on the quality index but I put it up to C since it clearly moved past Start. If you are interested in further improvement I would suggest submitting it to Peer Review and then going for GA status.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:22, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Many (more) thanks!ch (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Asahiyama stable[edit]

Hi, I've added some content and more citations to the Asahiyama article that you recently added a helpful edit to. It now has more citations than most sumo stables in the List of sumo stables article and the availability of citations (from different times as well, not all in the same week etc.) enforces it's eligibility no? I think it is bit too much if I make the decision myself and take down the "issues" tag. Could I ask you to take a look and make a decision to keep or take down? Thanks. FourTildes (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Islamopolitan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cosmopolitan (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) 09:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Ark Yuey Wong[edit]

Is he notable? The article is unsourced and I'm having trouble finding independent coverage.Mdtemp (talk) 14:51, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Mdtemp Reading it there is a lot suspect - Chinese art of Kung Fu (well Kung Fu is a generic term for Chinese martial arts) Master at 19 after a Dragon Dance. I was trying to find a source suspecting it was copy pasted and found Problem is I can not decide which was the chicken and which was the egg. So - tag the hell out of it and perhaps let the editor know there is an interest. One would think an original teacher of CMA in the US - would be notable but it would have to be supported.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Article creator NGK-Lion hasn't edited since 2011. I thought the ages looked suspicious (M at 19,GM at 31?), but being the first (or one of them) to teach CMA in the US would lend support to notability claim. But where are the sources? Since you lived in China I thought you might have heard of him or be able to find some sources or other enlightenment.Mdtemp (talk) 15:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
MdtempNone - China is a big place. I am also looking at Splashing hands which links to it - also problematic.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I'll leave these to you. They're a bit out of my comfort zone and I'm finding enough other questionable articles that I'm more comfortable putting up for discussion.Mdtemp (talk) 15:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
MdtempThat's fine. I probably will do so in the next little while. Probably after I see how the world reacts to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ng Ga Kuen.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I've done enough for today. Any thoughts on Senad Gashi?Mdtemp (talk) 16:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Mdtemp He's on my list. I personally like to give some time before I AfD. I am also going to submit Abdelwahid Habibullah.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
What happened to the Ark Yuey Wong article?Mdtemp (talk) 14:40, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Mdtemp It was copied wholesale from a web site. If you go to the article page it will tell you which one.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Thought that was the case.Mdtemp (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
It was so obvious that I got annoyed and went looking.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:12, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Abdelwahid Habibullah[edit]

Why is the Abdelwahid Habibullah page being considered for deletion?

The living person in question has been the subject of several coverage in the media like newspapers and TV too. All these references are provided on the page. Altimbukti (talk) 23:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

List of New Zealand super lightweight boxing champions categories[edit]

Should some of the categories that you deleted on List of New Zealand super lightweight boxing champions with this edit be added back to it? --Bamyers99 (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Bamyers99 Apologies for not being clear in the edit summary but I thought there was a clear case of category bombing. I removed redundant categories and what was better described in the subcategories.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Bamyers99 Oh I see my bad - I fixed that and thanks for catching it. I slipped in the clean-up of that class of Lists.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:42, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Ryushin Shouchi Ryu Article[edit]

Thank you for your suggestions. I am quite new to all this and trying to figure out how it all works. At first glace it seems a bit overwhelming. By any chance would you be able to give me any indication on whether or not my article is going to be approved?

Thank you for you advice and assistance. Nihon-no-budo (talk) 08:43, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Nihon-no-budo First of all I like the article but please remember there are lots of newly created martial arts that don't pass notability. Shinkendo (mentioned in one of your references) is a good example and the issue there was references. I do not know how good your Japanese is but wikipedia does not require references to be in English. Reading the article it seems to be there must be some sort of non-primary coverage that talks about this new art. That is what the decliner was pointing out and once addressed I am sure it would be accepted.
The other thing is that you keep reverting my commenting out of categories. While your article is in draft space it should not be categorised. There is good reason for that.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:58, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
I see you did. Actually the best way is to put a colon in from of the category as I did so that when it is moved the alteration is easy.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:01, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
PRehse Thank you for your valuable feedback. My Japanese is good enough to perform basic research and translations (I am from Miami, but lived in Japan for a couple of years while I completed my studies at International Budo University). I will continue to look around and see what I can do about adding some Japanese sources. Regarding the categories, I didn't mean to be stubborn, but it appeared that we were both editing at the same time. Either way, as you noted, I've already followed your advice. I appreciate your help with all this.Nihon-no-budo (talk) 13:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Nihon-no-budo No sweat - interesting about the International Budo University. Never did visit but they had some programs that I was close to attending - just could not make the time. The article is pretty good and should be up there - again some references that are independent plus some references that show the world wide reach. There are articles that have far less and still exist but what can you do. I was also interested to read that the school existed from the 60s (not sure if that is correct) but that would help with respect to the new school issue.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
PRehse, Thank you for your suggestions and support. Regarding the International Budo University, they are open to receive visitors year-round and offer accommodations at the school dorm at very reasonable rate. The history of Ryushin Shouchi Ryu is quite interesting, however, Yahagi Soke, prefers not have certain details outlined do to some disputes they had with the Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu group. The article as it stands is based on research that I did and was approved by Yahagi Soke himself. So yes, their dojo was established in the 60's under the Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu banner. When the current Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu soke became of age to take over the system after his father died arguments occurred. This led to the school becoming divided into two groups and left the Ryushin Shouchi Ryu with little historical lineage to fallback on. I have plenty of photos and videos that provide evidence that there once was a very close relationship, however, after the falling out neither one of them wishes to share this information. The only true evidence that shows this link is a lineage chart found on the Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu website which depicts the Ryushin Shouchi Ryu stemming from their system along with 4 or 5 other schools. Nihon-no-budo (talk) 19:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Nihon-no-budo Too late for me - I was teaching Aikido in Himeji for several years about 10 years ago but now 1000s of miles away. I know it is tough to work around politics - there is the expectations of wikipedia and the various parties involved. Anyway - see if you can bump up the references and I will try and help guide it in. Please remember that wikipedia is not supposed to be a front for any organization so if it gets put up - control is lost.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:29, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
PRehse, That must of been a great experience! I will do my best to bump up the references. As for if it gets up, I totally understand that it could become a free-for-all since its an open forum. I just want to make sure that what I post is acceptable by both parties involved. Thank you for your help in all of this. Nihon-no-budo (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
PRehse, Thank you for your help with my other articles. Its been quite an experience in learning how all this works, but I think I might be getting the hang of it. I have two questions for you. I have found dependable resources that will allow me to write the correct history of the Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu, how much of the article can I edit? Second, After I moved the Ryushin Shouchi Ryu Draft to the article space it was quickly moved back to the drafts space, what more can I do, other than wait, to get my article approved. It appears that the other articles, including the one I did on a living Japanese artist Nakajima Hiroyuki, were approved quite quickly. Thank you for your time and consideration. Nihon-no-budo (talk) 16:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Nihon-no-budo First of all you don't have to ping me if you post on my talk page - I will see it no matter. When I put your name on my talk page it is so that you know there is something for you there. For the Tenshin article nobody owns it so you are welcome to edit to your heart's content. The hope is that any factual changes are backed up with references and perhaps another editor will disagree - you take your chances. I was surprised that your (in the global sense) article was returned to Draft space - I actually left a message the that talk page of the editor that did it. The reversal surprised me but I guess in the end just submit and wait. In the mean time - if you find more and better references - add them. I do believe that submitting through Draft space is the more difficult option but it does serve the function of stronger articles entering article space.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Dear Peter, Thank you for your help and suggestions. I just read the note you left on the reviewer's talk page and I see that he has not responded yet. I am not too sure how this article wound up going through the drafts space, perhaps because there have been attempts in the past to submit articles about this particular school. I any case I will continue to wait to see what happens. Hopefully there will a positive result soon. I will continue to work on my smaller articles (stubs) as well as begin edits on the Jigen and Tenshisho articles as they both contain information that are not properly referenced and facts that are incorrect. Regards Frank Nieves —Preceding undated comment added 21:18, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kanmei Uechi[edit]

A tag has been placed on Kanmei Uechi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Re: Powr Rangers Ninja Steel[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, PRehse. You have new messages at Gogo Dodo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

more notability questions[edit]

Notability questions about Kaneko Shinkuro Morisada, Terasaka Yakuro Masatsune, and Togo Shigekata. Not surprised my internet search found nothing, but the references also look weak to me. However, this is far more your area of knowledge than mine.Mdtemp (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Mdtemp All these are historical characters important to a notable historical Japanese martial arts - I think they should be kept even if the references are not as strong as we should require for present day sports characters. I've had some discussions with the primary editor and would be inclined to let them be.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I hope he's still working on improving these articles. They seemed like they might be notable, but I wasn't sure. Will follow your lead and leave them alone.Mdtemp (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Mdtemp I have a bit of sympathy for the guy - he is stuck in an AfC loop on an article which I think should be passed.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your discussions and considerations on the entries I started. Yes, I will continue to work on these to improve them. I really appreciate your feedback. Regards Nihon-no-budo (talk) 19:18, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Boxing record tables.. a twist in the tale[edit]

An editor knowledgeable about table usage on WP recently made several edits like this, which (after some initial confusion on my part) made me completely re-think how I've gone about the tables. Apparently, customising them on a per-article basis is not best practice and goes against WP:ACCESS. All this time, I've been doing it wrong.. ach. But fair enough, I like a challenge—what's a few bumps in the road before attaining perfection?

So I went back to the previously-unused Template:Professional boxing record start and did some tweaking. Now it looks more or less like Template:MMA record start with a few minor differences (I tried separating round and time, but it looked weird having a blank space for decisions). As an experiment, I edited one table for a former boxer and here's how it looks.

As you can see, it looks almost identical to MMA, but radically different to the standardised one I've been pushing for the past year. In some ways I like it—the sortable function was something I was always keen on—yet on the other hand it'll be mighty laborious to do all that converting again with the many articles I've already overhauled. Plus, the top row with fight stats is gone. No idea how to work that into a table.

The way I see it, I have three options: 1. Stick with the current per-article table which several editors seem OK with, but risk getting deeper into non-WP:ACCESS territory; 2. Accept the changes by the aforementioned user who knows more than me when it comes to tables, and try to slowly apply their advice across other articles, but still run foul of WP:ACCESS; 3. Be bold (just like before), do a U-turn, and start a slow migration to the new template, to ensure that I am in line with WP:ACCESS whenever the MOS goes through.

I'm inclined towards 3, since the MOS was mainly about covering weight classes and other such formats, and that's more or less in the bag. I don't expect much protesting on that part anymore, besides maybe some childish rants about how lineal titles are formatted. The record tables were always secondary for me, and I merely adopted that task (and the flags) as I went along. If this change means more delay, I really don't mind. My thing is about keeping all bases covered, and this WP:ACCESS thing was a big oversight on my part.

Advice? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:25, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate Its hard for me to see any real difference between the different formats. I like the Fight Stats on the top row. It is unclear how the two table formats that you say go against WP:ACCESS do go against it. How does 2 run afoul of WP:ACCESS?Peter Rehse (talk) 23:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Apparently "the use of bold markup and colouring instead of standard table headings violates WP:ACCESSIBILITY standards", and that I "should avoid adding spurious styling to tables". Just quoting what I've been advised. I think what goes against WP:ACCESS is the fight stats being force-formatted in bold/plain, and the use of different colouring for the column headings. Not a good thing, supposedly. Admittedly, to me that's a load of crap and the table looks unsightly without them, but if WP says it's bad... So what I'm faced with is either going along with that; or continuing to push my original one (and risk those getting an WP:ACCESS-compliant "makeover" as well); or bring in the template which would make them look closer to their MMA counterparts. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 00:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Aaaaand #2 is what I've decided to go with. I weighed it up and figured that it'll make for minimal fuss, and it's just the simplest option—a pain-free conversion from s-start to wikitable. Guess I had one of my 'ambitious' moments with matching the MMA table, but then I was able to imagine other editors' shock at seeing that all of a sudden. Maybe some will still take exception to the lack of centre-alignment and grey column headings, but if that's how WP:TABLE works, then that's how it works. And if a teeny bit of boldface on the fight stats row isn't the best idea... well, screw it, I'm putting it there anyway. Having now replicated what the aforementioned editor did with the other article, does this look OK to you? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 00:12, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Help on Kunlun Fight?[edit]


I while ago I presented the case on the kickboxing task force page that Kunlun Fight should have it's on page and you among others generally agreed.

I made the page Draft:Kunlun_Fight and some other people pitched into it too. The other people also went ahead and made 2014 in Kunlun Fight and 2015 in Kunlun Fight which I wouldn't have personally made at least before the main article was accepted but that's out of my hands.

Anyway the draft has been waiting to be approved for a while and now, I'm sure a well meaning person, is telling me that perhaps the main article shouldn't be made but that the 2014, 2015 in Kunlun Fight kind of pages are fine without the main article. Which, as I'm sure you understand, makes no sense. If there's anything you can do to help I'd appreciate it.
ShadessKB (talk) 03:48, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 11 July[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Kbach Yuthakun Tvear Prambey Bôran Khmer[edit]

What do you think of the notability of this? Of course a google search in English found nothing. As currently written, it doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG because of a lack of sources but ancient Asian martial arts are not my specialty. I'd say if it is notable, the article needs a major rewrite.Mdtemp (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

.Mdtemp I hate it. It has a rambling background on apparently an ancient form but if you look further down it is about someone piggy backing on that. There is no evidence of a connection between the new and the old.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Katlyn Chookagian[edit]

I am sure she passes WP:NMMA. --Rainbow Archer (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Rainbow Archer Not really with just one top tier fight. I would wait until she has had at least 2 before submitting.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
How to know that among her 8 fights mentioned in sherdog, which fights are top-tier fights. Wikipedia has ridiculous pages like Mandingo fights. The sport and fights never existed but they kept the page. --Rainbow Archer (talk) 23:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
User:Rainbow Archer See WP:MMATIER. I think Mandingo fights isn't notable either but it is a different thing than biography pages - and the article refers to press coverage so a case can be made.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Craig Miller (wrestler)[edit]

Hi PRense, what's the rationale with removing Category:New Zealand sportsmen from Craig Miller? It doesn't seem to be a duplicate category. Cheers Mattlore (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg Thank you for reviewing my pages on India. Regards, Prof TPMS (talk) 23:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Marc Diakiese Page[edit]

You have said that the MMA Fighter, Marc Diakiese, who I made a page is a non-notable athlete. You said that getting signed to the UFC is not enough to be a notable athlete but you have not acknowledged this athletes other achievements, I will now explain why I believe his other achievements do make him a notable athlete. Firstly, this athlete was a title holder in BAMMA, which is the largest European MMA promotion. Secondly, as well as being a title holder in BAMMA he also fought a large majority of his professional fights with the promotion. Thirdly, you spoke about this athlete as if he is a fresh unproven fighter even though he has 9 professional fights so far and has won every single one of his fights. Finally, there have been many news reports about this athletes MMA fights on many major news sites, which has probably also gained him much notoriety. I believe due to all of these reasons Marc Diakiese is a notable athlete and the page I created about him should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kubus18 (talkcontribs) 19:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Book Promo Bombing[edit]

Hi @PRehse:,

I'm pretty new to the Wikipedia experience and I wanted to contribute by adding some books I've read on these subjects.

On the German Wikipedia (here) I was explained how and when to ad "Further reading" correctly.

Kind regards,

--Wim Le Petit Prince (talk) 08:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Wim Le Petit Prince: Fair enough - but it had the appearance of promoting the author rather than adding to the subject. I actually like the series but putting them everywhere there is even a tenuous connection goes against what wikipedia is about. You might notice that I did not revert all additions.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@PRehse: Yes, I did notice that. Promoting one author was not the objective. I was actually about to add more books and links to articles from authors like Donn F. Draeger, David Hall, Meik and Diane Skoss, Dave Lowry, Karl Friday, Ellis Amdur, Hunter Armstrong, Thomas Cleary, Antony Cummins, ... before my contributions were removed and I was explained how to proceed on this in the future. I'm learning the hard way.

Thanks and kind regards, --Wim Le Petit Prince (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

I started with Mol because I just finished reading hist last book (Takeda Shinobi Hiden) and wanted to recommend it. Next step was his other books, which I also liked. --Wim Le Petit Prince (talk) 09:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Wim Le Petit Prince: The better way is to insert the books as part of a reference - connected to a fact. Further reading should be used sparsely and tends to be abused by book promotions - hence the quick reaction. Wikipedia is not the place for book recommendations but I understand the desire - like I said I like his books.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@PRehse: In retrospect I fully agree. Thanks again! --Wim Le Petit Prince (talk) 09:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


I want to userfy it.

Different sports have different notability rules, Why all sports don't have the same rule. And why junior world champion, national champion and gold medalist covered in BBC, Mirror fail WP:GNG? I have seen articles about living painters, who don't have any mention in news, but their art galleries, still they are notable. --Marvellous Spider-Man 18:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@Marvellous Spider-Man: I understand that but it should not have been done by a move while under AfD. Usually it is requested and done by the closing admin.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
The thing is that I didn't know about WP:NKICK, so, I think the nominator may be right that the article fails WP:NKICK, but no one is saying that he should have informed me of this AFD. Is it okay that he didn't notify on my talk page? I actually don't understand how she fails WP:GNG according to the reasons I mentioned in that AFD. Let it be moved from the mainspace to my userspace draft. I am not asking you to change your vote as that would be canvassing, I am just requesting userfication of that article into a userspcae draft and your views on that. Thanks--Marvellous Spider-Man 18:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
@Marvellous Spider-Man: Well it is not deleted yet and you have made your arguments. What I would advise is to wait a couple of days to see how the AfD goes and if it looks like the consensus is Delete then ask there that it be userfied.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Abimanyu Page - I have made necessary references...[edit]

i am unable to upload the pic of the actor.

now whatelse you want me to do... to make this page as valid... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthikdhil (talkcontribs) 20:59, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Adam blampied[edit]

Hello PRehse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Adam blampied, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: R3 does not apply to redirects as a result of page moves. Thank you. -- GB fan 11:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Your update to Valentin Slavikovski article[edit]

Dear PRehse

I am new to Wikipedia.. I have seen you have undone my edits on Valentine Slavikovski page, particularly, internal links and a change to a name of the "Soviet Wings Sport Palace". What have I done wrong with it? here are details:

21:15, 29 August 2016‎ PRehse (talk | contribs)‎ . . (8,719 bytes) (-84)‎ . . (Undid revision 736788708 by Stepka o (talk)overlinking) (undo | thank)

many thanks regards, Stepka o Stepka o (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Stepka o: It was for WP:OVERLINKING. Basically put in internal links only once per article and no need to link common countries like America etc. Soviet Wings Sports Palace is ok.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:56, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
@PRehse:Thank you for your answer. I didn't know about overlinking / or missed this. Now linked back the Sport Palace. Stepka o (talk) 11:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)


I think dealing with a generation of people who haven't been told "no" enough times and feel like everything should be to please them has gotten to me. OK--that's a generalization but I have had it with sore losers who seek to blame others for their results. Another generalization, but I'm frustrated which is why I've been cutting back on my WP usage. Perhaps it's time to just quit--that would make some happy. Sorry, Peter--just venting. Papaursa (talk) 04:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Papaursa: Laughs - well you never know the current incarnation may be of our generation but I get it. I saw that early and spent days trying to avoid saying something. In the end I was dragged in not necessarily by the accusation but the inuendo. I said my piece and feel better for it.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I've just made what may be my final edit on WP, at least if Marvellous Spider-Man has his way. It would be a miscarriage of justice, but those things happen. If so, I want to tell you it's been a pleasure dealing with you and trying to help clean up, at least on WP, the mess that is martial arts. Papaursa (talk) 00:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
@Papaursa: Oh ye of little faith - I don't think anything will come of it and it is the nature of the beast that every now and then you get the righteous cop wanna be. Looking at his edits in general that's what I'm seeing.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:14, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
My real life has been very stressful lately, lowering my desire to do much of anything besides what I have to. I want WP to be a diversion, not a stress inducer. Papaursa (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
We can take this off-line if you want but I hear you. I also have real world stress and have been using WP perhaps too much as a diversion to the point where your past dark escape seemed the smart thing to do. I might start my own next week to get out of the WP rut (or at least a shallower one). WP should be a pleasure not a further burden and annoying little (insert suitable explective) do not make it easier.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion alerts[edit]

Don't forget to alert users to speedy deletions - the "but I have secret permission to violate this copyright" timewasting at Talk:Arakan (martial art) could (hopefully) have been avoided if you'd given the user the boilerplate "don't use copyrighted text, if it's yours then read WP:COPYREQ" alert template. --McGeddon (talk) 09:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit summaries[edit]

You have been asked before, but can you please start using edit summaries. It is particularly important when nominating articles for deletion. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


Greetings amidst the sweltering heat of England. It's been more than three months and there remains no vocal opposition or feedback on the MOS—neither on Talk:WikiProject Boxing nor bio articles. I decided to be extra-bold and just whizz around a shitload of articles, converting them all to wikitable, and adding the summary box (which was my homage to the MMA records). Almost as if to saturation-bomb as many of them as possible, to make it appear as though it's "the thing to do now". Sneaky, but hey—the lack of resistance says it all.

With that said, it's absolutely ready to be put in place on the Project page; set in stone; made final; bang the gavel—the works. What exactly is the process for that? If it's based on garnering support/oppose votes at WPBoxing, then that's a dead end. Nobody there has chimed in whatsoever after the flags debate dust settled, despite being given multiple opportunities during my running updates (if they didn't keep Talk:WPBoxing on their watchlists, then tough). I'm even willing to forego the flags crux for a while longer and simply add a small guideline on their usage, as long as the rest of the MOS is incontestably in place.

Or, am I to understand that if there is no community-wide feedback on a bid for consensus (i.e., silence), then it cannot be put in place at all? A failed motion, basically. I keep reading over the history of how MOS:MMA came about in 2011–12, and my goodness it looks like a battlefield. Users like this, this, this, and this make me wary of types like those who are ready to collectively craw out of the woodwork and make comments like "It's not policy, it's a guideline set by some deluded individual who thought that 2 or 3 people formed a consensus, when the clear majority disagreed."

Either way, would you say that WP:PROPOSAL should be my next step? It still irks me a bit that the last RfC mainly attracted those only interested in the flags, and not on the wider scale of the MOS—they just upped and left after the no-consensus on those. Therefore it seems as though this needs input from elsewhere than just WPBoxing, as this community is simply not active enough despite what the participants list indicates. There's only you, me, and maybe one or two other editors I could dredge up, which cannot possibly fulfil consensus on an MOS that looks to cover thousands of articles. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Mac Dreamstate I have escaped to the swealtering heat of Germany with only the occasional foray into Wikipedia. Listen no one can say that consensus was not built and frankly I think enough has been done. There is no need for proposal just put any finishing touches you feel is necessary. The big issue is flags. I think I mentioned it before but I would leave that alone for a good long time and allow the remainder of the MOS to gather some dust.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:44, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
It's about as ready as I can ever make it. I can keep tweaking bits of it to my heart's content, but now it's time to "Let It Go" (*puke* at that song, although it always makes for a good reference). If anyone happens to get antsy about why flag usage isn't included, I'll just pull up the RfC whilst invoking WP:NOCONSENSUS and WP:WORDPRECEDENCE (as in, "Consistency is not paramount"; articles without flags originally shouldn't have them inserted, and vice versa). The main thing I learned from last year is to not go around removing existing flags for the time being, but at the same time I sure as hell am not letting them be added to articles that I've created. I don't feel that's a case of WP:OWN—just an adherence to WP guidelines.
Nonetheless, if you're sure. The pessimist/WP realist in me still keeps imagining someone like this fellow barging back in and saying "Yo, what consensus? I didn't agree to nothin'. You ain't no damn admin." All it takes is someone like that, plus an ensuing edit war, and the whole thing could unravel in a heap when I try to prove to admins or whoever that consensus was sought and silently agreed upon, when all I had was silence. I wouldn't even know where to go with that—WP:EW, WP:DR, etc. Or, is it just something that will need tackling only if/when it happens? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Mac Dreamstate Go for it. Now or later those people will still exist. Best we can do is toss out the bone and fend off the dogs. In a few days I can watch/support better.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:10, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Right. Should it go on the main WPBoxing page as a {{main article}} link, under its own section? It's too large to paste there in its entirety (unlike MOS:MMA), but it also needs a high level of visibility so that it can be easily referred to or studied by those interested in the project. In a section near the top, immediately under Scope, perhaps? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Mac Dreamstate No idea - I thought in the info box was OK but ...Peter Rehse (talk) 17:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, it's done now. Take a looksie, or via the shortcuts MOS:BOXING and WP:BOXING/MOS. I also put in shortcuts for the various sections that'll no doubt be needed when referring editors to them, such as MOS:BOXING/INFOBOX, MOS:BOXING/RECORD, etc. After nearly two years, it's been about damn time! So hopefully, if edit wars arise in which some user disagrees with something, I can go straight to WP:EWN and they'll see that I've at least made an effort this whole time. Granted, it may create the need for yet more wrangling at Talk:WPBoxing—including RfCs—but it's not as though I haven't opened the floor for feedback before. Any users who've complained hardly ever hang around to see it through, whereas I'm still at it.
Above all, I'd like to thank you for having the patience in dealing with me and my whining, sulking and trigger-happy editing, and the advice dished out in keeping me in check. By no means would I have been able to stick with it on my own without the encouragement. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect edit[edit]

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that this edit was not ok. First, you removed a valid red link. William Kendall was notable for swimming through the rapids, so it's fine to red link him. Secondly, you actually changed the quote, which was "...farther than Kendall did." The "William" was in square brackets because it wasn't part of the original quote. Stevage 00:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey Arnold!: The Jungle Movie[edit]

I have declined your copyvio speedy because the source (Wikia) is CC-BY-SA licensed. At the 2014 AfD this was thought to be just rumour and fancruft, but it now seems from IMDb that it's real. JohnCD (talk) 11:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)