User talk:Singularity/Archive 4

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

The Meaning Of Love (album)

Can you please drop a {{db-author}} tag on the page you created for The Meaning Of Love (album)? Or, if you do mean to write an article, can you please move it to The Meaning of Love (album) per WP:ALBUMS? Thanks, Closenplay 15:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


You said here that you would protect the Knin page here [1] because a user and his numerous IP numbers are bent on pushing his extreme POV, but the page is still not protected. Is there a reason for that? Thanks. --Jesuislafete 17:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the feedback on WP:AN. It is sincerely appreciated. Vassyana 11:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Offensive username?

Do you even know what the word squaw means? Judging by what I see here, I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't. You managed to put in 60 userboxes there without any impressive results. You are obviously a teenager--I would guess ca. 13 years old. That must explain why you didn't know how to undo your autoblock. I can't edit using my static IP address now--at least until the autoblock expires. When I was your age, we would say a lot worse things than squaw to each other without breaking down in tears like you have. Quit crying and get a girlfriend. Then get off your ass and learn something, so you can put it on your subpage. You're nobody.--SQUAW 57 05:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


Sr13. Aloha nō. It has been a while since I have heard from you. Hope all is well. Mālama pono! -- Kanaka maoli i puuwai 07:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

When did you get your adminship? BTW, have you seen the Hawaiʻi Portal that I started? That was tough getting it up and running. Now I am at the maintaining stage which isnt so bad. -- Kanaka maoli i puuwai 07:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Here, I added the timstamps so that it will archive. -- Kanaka maoli i puuwai 07:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


This is brilliant.

of course, google translate is blocked. :(

Elfin341 17:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Aloha...Need some kōkua from a local sistah!!

Eh, howzit! I am trying to get permission to AutoWikiBrowser, so that I can go and add nā ʻokina as appropriate. I was denied for not having enough "main space" edits. You think that you can hook me up? Shootz! -- Kanaka maoli i puuwai 04:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

you not a sistah?

Are you kāne or wāhine? I thought at one time you told me you was one wāhine! If not, and you are kāne, then I apologize plenny. Kanaka maoli i puuwai 05:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Ho, braddah, kala mai iaʻu. Kala mai nui nui! No get huhÅ«, eh! Brah, fo realz I thought you wen tell me befo dat you was da kine, wāhine. Kala mai iaʻu! K den, shootz. Auryte! Ua mau ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono!! -- Kanaka maoli i puuwai 05:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


I have a concern regarding the closure of the suicide userbox. Is there a specific policy basis that supports the deletion? It seems that there was a diversity of opinion in the deletion review that (to me) suggests the lack of clear consensus regarding the deletion. I'm open to your views on it, but I was hoping you'd be willing to reconsider the closure and allow more community input on this deletion. --Ssbohio 20:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I've posted a detailed response to your comments on my talk page. --Ssbohio 05:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


thanks for protecting Middle Ages. I was getting sick of the vandalism Jru Gordon 06:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for Page Protection

You recently declined a request for page protection of mine without giving any valid reason. Could you please provide one? I've since had to revert even more IP vandalism. --CA387 15:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. :) --CA387 17:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarinet semiprotection

Hi you granted Clarinet semi-protection for one week (thanks!) but the page isn't semi-protected. Could you check on this. Thanks. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 17:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


Stupid performance tomorrow...---=Elfin=-341 01:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


You LOST your laptop??? Wow... that's a first...

I just love this sig!--> -=Elfin=-341 03:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Hawaii

Hi. Do you have any objection to being listed as an admin on the project? —Viriditas | Talk 04:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Math enable

I have installed MediaWiki 1.9 on my own machine ( My OS is Windows XP). How can I enable math (latex) extension? What kind of .php file should I download? Thanx. wic2020talk bicara 07:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I've asked User:Reedy Boy to help answer your question. In the event he does, he will respond to you. Sr13 07:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


Hi. Just letting you know, I've unblocked User:Akhil123456789 as an improper username block. I don't believe this username falls under the scope of "usernames that consist of a lengthy or apparently random sequence of characters", nor of "usernames that are extremely lengthy". As blocks are a very sensitive issue, please submit a WP:RFCN entry next time you come across a non-blatant infringement of the username policy. Thanks. Michaelas10 13:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for that; the username is borderline of the policy, though. Sr13 23:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Raiding Userboxes

Don't mind me, just raiding content from your userboxes :) I will clean up my page I'm editing. Mathiastck 15:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Arbuthnot (bishop)

Please could you restore the history? - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Sr13 23:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Towel Day!!

Happy Towel Day!! Long time no see! Sorry I haven't been keeping up much lately, I've not had any time to edit lately, just one or two things here or there, occasionally. Happy Summer Vacation!! (that is, if you're out of school yet :) ). Cheers!! Ninetywazup?Review meMy ToDo 22:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I just read the message from that guy SQUAW 57. He doesn't sound to nice :) Cheers!! Ninetywazup?Review meMy ToDo 01:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I was just looking through your userboxes (and, er... copying them to, er, my UBX page... sorry :) and noticed that you were a conservative Republican. Go Conservative Republicans!! Ninetywazup?Review meMy ToDo 01:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Schickele pe.jpg

It's unacceptable that you deleted Image:Schickele pe.jpg without any discussion. The discussion page for that image shows up as a redlink. This is very, very bad WP practice. Badagnani 06:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I was very clear. We must always have transparency. The way you did it there was (and remains) none. This continued practice of deletion without discussion (the discussion page for that image remains a redlink) does not engender trust and does not signify good faith on the part of the deleter. Badagnani 06:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Your protection of Prem Rawat

A request for mediation on Prem Rawat has been filed and agreed by the parties. I have the impression that disputes on this subjects will always re-surface and that mediation only will help a little bit. Andries 18:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


Perhaps it's not all that useful to relist pages on AFD that have been relisted once already? >Radiant< 09:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, but people have relisted more than once in the past. Sr13 09:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I know, and it's not just about you, but I don't think prolonging a debate indefinitely is all that helpful. Some debates don't attract all that much attention because sometimes nobody much cares; at a certain point, closing it as whatever is better than giving it yet another term. >Radiant< 09:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I see your point. Sr13 09:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well done...

... for being the brave admin to close that [2] bloody awful AfD and with a nice summary. I've been waiting for that mess to be over. Btw, on the issue above - I always look for the oldest/sparsest AfD debates to add my opinion on - thereby hopefully helping stuck debates to reach consensus. I've noticed other editors who do the same. So, from my point of view re-listing a second or even third time just puts the AfD more firmly on the radar and attracts more opinions - I think it is a very helpful thing to do. See you 'round the 'pedia. Cheers, Paxse 10:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Geez...thanks! Sr13 02:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi Sr13. I have a small note. You check the minor edit box for almost all edits you make, and from what I saw many of those edits are not minor. Well, that kind of defeats the purpose of the minor edit button and is a bit misleading. Would you consider marking as minor only the edits which are minor indeed? Thanks. You can reply here. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I had the "mark all edits minor by default" feature checked. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me, but I guess it can be misleading...thanks for noting that out. Sr13 04:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


Hey mate, I just realized then that you had co-nominated me! I am truly greatful for your kind words and your nomination/support. If I fail this RfA, I will have gained a friend. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 08:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Sr13. I'll do my utmost to live up to your expectations, RfA pass or not. Kind regards, Dfrg.msc 08:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Golf Newsletter


Sorry I listed MagicISO for review so quickly. I should have come to you first. In any event, you deleted it, apparently based on the AfD from May 27th, which was a speedy for spam. The article was subsequently recreated in substantially different form and the article you deleted conformed to WP:SPAM. Please undelete it. 16:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

First, you should create an account so it is easier to communicate to you. I deleted the article because the closer apparently didn't do so, and I agreed with the decision. If you have created a better version, please create and account, then userfy your version and ask for a review. Sr13 23:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
As you can see from the log, the closer did delete the article immediately after closing it. The article you deleted differed substantially from the article that was AfD'd. It should thus not have been deleted without at least a prod if not another AfD nom. 01:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Even though my reason for deletion may have been wrong, the article was still liable for deletion under G4, recreation of deleted material. Looking at the restoration log, there is nothing substantially different from the (earlier) deleted version. Sr13 01:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Please e-mail me all 3 versions of the article when they were deleted. Jamesmusik 20:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Instead, I've userfied all three revisions here. Sr13 21:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. You can get rid of that if you like. 08:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The Office songs AFD

You closed the AFD for List of songs featured on The Office (US TV series) on May 29th but the article is still up. Can you take care of the deletion? Otto4711 16:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Done- thanks for reminding me. Sr13 22:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The Artemis Fowl WikiProject

Hi. In the last month I have discovered the Artemis Fowl WikiProject and have slowly but surely been making progress. I have, however, noticed that no one else seems to be doing anything. So, it's as simple as this. Respond to this message, or your name gets removed from the participants list and I assume leadership of the WikiProject, because I will actually get something done. You have exactly 1 week, or 7 days, or 168 hours. They all mean the same thing.

However, please know that this is nothing personal against you. This is a generic message sent to every person on the participants list. Thanks for your co-operation. -007bond aka Matthew G aka codingmasters 10:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question

Over a month ago, you marked the article Wireless Zero Configuration as a copyvio of this. It doesn't appear to be so, and now the article has been noted at deletion review. Can you explain? Sr13 20:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Compare the last three paragraphs to the last four paragraphs at the "Zero Client Configuration" section on that link. They are identical. Now take a look at the deleted history: the first revision was a direct copy of that whole section, and later edits changed only the first paragraph. It was correctly deleted as a copyvio, and later restored by Given all that, it's a clear case where the whole page history is a copyvio, and the only solution is to delete it and rewrite from scratch. --cesarb 01:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed this. I checked the first few sentences but missed the stuff in the center. - hahnchen 11:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


Hello Sr13 :-) Please remember when deleting articles after they have been listed at AfD to include a link to the debate in the reason for deletion, it makes it easier for other users to see the debate — should this be necessary, thanks and happy editing! The Sunshine Man 18:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Another good reminder for me... :) Sr13 19:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Great, thanks for taking it on board :-). Kindest Regards --The Sunshine Man 19:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sr13-

The Debate on the deletion of Pascal DeMaria was hardly a debate! I wrote that a google search resulted in this man's notability yet you still took the page off...why? I was in the middle of collecting citations when I was no longer able to editi the page. I'm not sure if its possible to re-publish the page, but as a member of the general public, I believe the information benefitted someone, and all that was needed were citations which I would be glad to put up there. Please reconsider.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Presidents by longevity 2nd nom

You closed the above article as a no consensus. My review of the discussion showed that there was a clear consensus to keep the articles in question, by a strong 2-1 margin. This article had already faced an earlier Afd, initiated less than three weeks before this current AfD. If the AfD for this article is appropriately marked as Keep in accord with the majority view, the articles will be protected by the terms of WP:CONSENSUS. There is every reason to believe that a third (and fourth, and fifth...) attempt will be made to delete this article given its closure as a no consensus, and is probably just a few weeks away. I strongly suggest that you revisit the AfD, review the clear consensus established, and change the AfD result to Keep in accordance with the overwhelming majority preference. Alansohn 04:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Gracenotes story

Two things - first, that the full answer from Gracenotes should probably be included, and second- when Gracenotes' RFA is closed, I assume you'll update the story? Otherwise, it's great. Ral315 » 04:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I mean in the same story (I'm assuming that the RFA will be closed by Monday); however, if you don't have time to, that's fine. Ral315 » 07:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Blood atonement protection

Hi, Sr13. I notice you've just fulfilled the request for page protection on Blood atonement. A few hours ago, there was an edit war of sorts in progress at that article. However, I believe the situation has now been defused somewhat (see the talk page) - I initiated discussion there as an uninvolved party with the hope that protection could be staved off and the parties seem now to be making the beginnings of constructive progress towards an NPOV article. I would therefore respectfully ask that you consider reducing the duration of or removing entirely the full protection from this article so as to allow this progress to continue. I will be watching the article closely and will call a halt to any re-escalation should it occur. Best regards, --YFB ¿ 06:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks very much. Hopefully my faith in the various editors isn't misplaced :-) --YFB ¿ 06:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Barbie protection

I protected before I saw your note. If you feel protection is excessive, please feel free to undo it. Cheers, Riana ⁂ 09:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you did...then I would respect your decision. Sr13 09:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
OK! I try not to hand out protections too lightly, but sometimes I slip up, so if you feel this is one of those times, please go ahead and change it, I won't mind at all :) Riana ⁂ 10:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I slip up too, you know :) Sr13 10:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antione

In the preceding Afd, which you closed as delete all, the article Proctologist Nefarious, a member of the Afd, was never deleted. I don't know if it was an oversight, or if there's some kind of more complicated history behind it (I checked deletion review, and I can't imagine that article being undeleted anyhow). Deranged bulbasaur 19:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right; my oversight. Sr13 20:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Toi (name)

Hi Sr13. I've recreated Toi_(name), an article you speedied a few days ago. An experienced editor with expert knowledge in matters Polynesian and Maori asked me about it. I suggest that we let him have a go at it for a few days to see whether he can produce a keepable article. We could run it through WP:DV], but I think that it's better just to be WP:BOLD and get on with making the project better. All the best, Bucketsofg 17:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Your Gracenotes RfA story

Hi. I took a quick look at your Signpost article on the Gracenotes RfA. It was very well-written, but I was struck by the comment in the story that "it became consensus was not reached." In the everyday sense of the word "consensus" that may be true, but within the specialized way we use the word on RfA that's still the open question the bureaucrats are working on deciding, so you might (or might not) want to rephrase those couple of words. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

DRV Note


At a recent DRV, you made the statement that copyvios are not open to review. This is not entirely accurate: DRV (on an ad hoc basis) will handle claims that copyvio deletions were improper. These claims are usually wrong, I can remember two or three succeeding for very good reasons: 1.) The source claimed as being under copyright is actually in the public domain (we once had a load of deletions based on the false belief that a US Navy site was under copyright), or 2) The copyrighted content does not match what was in the article, or doesn't match some diffs in the article history that are keep-worthy.

Without commenting on the specific closure you made, speedy closures of copyright DRVs are not always in order. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I remember that DRV, and I understand. Sr13 17:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 05:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

one treeeellion

This showed up at WP:DRV#1000000000000 (number) (closed) where there was support for relisting for a full 5 day discussion, but we're now confusingly at WP:RFD. I couldn't care less what happens to the article, but to minimize confusion and reduce tensions I'd like to just reopen the AFD and let it run. Apparently it wasn't snow. Do you have any objection to my doing so? ··coelacan 09:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll reopen and close the RFD. Sr13 09:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Interested editors will hopefully feel satisfied whatever the result after five days. It was hard to predict that this would have been a problem, though. ··coelacan 09:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Adoption Status

Hi, I hope you dont mind but I've updated your status at the adopters page and changed it to say you are an admin because you were sysoppped to avoid new users to get confused as it said you were not an admin. Hope you dont mind! Regards --The Sunshine Man 19:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Sr13 19:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

MediationBarnstar.png The Mediation Award
Mediation is a difficult matter. It is rarely the case that a mediator will achieve a total consensus, and thus by definition they are entering into an area where they are guaranteeing someone will probably at least disagree with them at the end of the process. Thank you for being willing to take on this task, and it seemed to me appropriate for someone to thank you for this often thankless work. John Carter 19:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)}}
I do hope that you don't let the (possibly extreme) nature of this mediation lead you to think that any future mediations will be as rancorous, and possibly keep you from taking them on. I hope that in most other cases there is at least a bit more agreement on basic terms, if nothing else. I do think you did a good job, and am grateful for your assistance. John Carter 23:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I've seen at least one heavier dispute than this a while ago (the talk page of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, archive 8). I learned quite a bit on how to improve my future mediations from this dispute. And don't worry, I will definitely continue to mediate for the cabal. Sr13 00:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Ty Cobb

I'm curious as to which "content dispute" you were looking at on the Cobb page. If it's about that one editor's external links, that's truly a dispute. If it's about his career hits total and other stats, the battle is with on of the endless sockpuppets of User:Ron liebman, who has had several of us watching for his constant POV-pushing on a variety of articles, including Cobb. In any case, with the page being blocked for a week, things have a chance to simmer down. Thank you. d:) Baseball Bugs 23:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

  • You need to leave it blocked for now, I think, until everyone can agree on things. Baseball Bugs 23:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
    • That's just my opinion. Some other editors are more active in that article, so you might expect to hear from them also. Baseball Bugs 23:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
      • I'll keep it protected, unless others have an objection. Sr13 23:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Baseball Bugs - SR13 responded to my request, so we can work out the mass reversion issue. I think I said that on the Cobb discussion page (and you responded to it -- so I'm a bit confused by your confusion). ... In any case, thanks SR13 for your help. Guanxi 01:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm just all confused. Sorry for adding to the confusion. I may be wrong, but I think the biggest problem on this page was with the guy who radically altered the page, namely User:Tecmobowl. He's currently partway into a 48-hour block and says on his talk page that he's quitting. Having gone through similar angst a month ago, I doubt he's actually quitting. But that controversy may have simmered for the time being. Baseball Bugs 10:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

What to do

I've added a small note at the top of the page, but since most people have already read the Signpost, a story next week would be the best way to update. If you're willing to write the follow-up story, that'd be great. Ral315 » 02:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


I think you forgot to actually delete it. Someguy1221 03:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I was actually in a rush; hopefully you'll forgive me. Thank you for reminding me. Sr13 03:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Jooler

Like I said. You were in error. Jooler 12:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for that; please forgive me. Sr13 14:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Sr13, you were not in error. Jooler is taking an extremely liberal interpretation of policy that is not supported. --Durin 01:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


Hi, the problem with those pages that I put up for speedy deletion is they say things like "Major League Baseball player" and Major league pitcher" and they are false. Entirely false. Someone made several pages for several guys who just got drafted. These guys have not signed contracts yet and they have definitely progressed through the minor leagues to the big leagues. If these guys deserve articles then every minor league baseball player deserves and article and that would be ridiculous. Ekillian 08:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, still asserts notability, however small it may be, although I agree that most of the players don't meet notability guidelines. I strongly suggest you take this to AfD as a mass nom, or bring the situation up to WP:AN. Sr13 08:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

To my nominator..

For you...

Dear , I'm sorry for the late message, there's been lots to do. I regarldess of the result, I can't thank you enough for the chance you have given me, and although I failed the RfA, I gained many friends.

I am not the type of editor to be disheartened by such a result, and have gained much experience. If you have anything to contribute by way of improvements or comments, please don’t hesitate to tell me.

I will run again. Kind regards, Dfrg.msc 06:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)