User talk:TYelliot/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Mini Psicosis

Since I don't have rollback rights, I can't undo the vandalism done to Mini Psicosis by User:76.202.250.108.

I've fixed it, but you could have done it: the way to revert several vandal edits (which even rollbackers may have to use if several vandals have been at work) is to find the last good version in the history, and click on the time-and-date entry towards the left of the line. That brings up that version; then if you click "Edit" and then "Save", that version will be restored (with various warnings to be sure you know what you are doing). Use an edit summary like "Revert vandalism to version by MPJ-DK at 23:02, 16 August", so that anyone looking at the history can see what has happened. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your insightful guidance. TYelliot (talk) 19:05, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

I'm not comfortable granting your request for rollback since you only registered yesterday and aren't even autoconfirmed yet; however rollback is an area I don't normally dwell in and you may have better success posting your request on WP: Requests for permissions. —Soap— 15:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll wait then. Thanks. --TYelliot (talk) 15:49, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Battle of Aldenhoven (1794) Wonderful Days Kallar Kahar Tehsil Treaty of Leoben Constitution of the Year VIII Center for International Environmental Law Killers (2010 film) Declaration of Pillnitz Cartes du Ciel Jacques Maurice Hatry Iyaz Khairpur, Chakwal Let Me In (film) Ciel (beverage) Crunkcore Charles Bertin Gaston Chapuis de Tourville Peter Quasdanovich Catherine Théot Jean-Henri Voulland

Cleanup Konijeti Rosaiah Pierre Gaspard Chaumette List of The Super Dimension Fortress Macross episodes Merge Timeline of the Mongol Empire Général Leningrad Nuclear Power Plant II Add Sources Date Night Kick-Ass (film) The Best of L'Arc-en-Ciel C/W Wikify List of cabinet ministers of Andhra Pradesh Chaudhry Chaku Khan Tamga Expand Chouannerie Prince Frederick, Duke of York and Albany Denise Johnson

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page List of school pranks has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. WikiTome ^Talk 13:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

In fact I have always known this as a 'nipple gripple' as one grips the victim's nipple. The other edit I made was because of my understanding that putting "and also" there would signal to the reader that the list has ended. Moreover I have specified in the edit summary about the purpose of my edits. If I receive no further reply from you, I'll strike through the warning. TYelliot (talk) 13:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Format

I have undone a minor edit here at China-Korea Treaty of 1882 . This format change restores a more conventional presentation. In this context, my thinking was informed by File:Wikipedia layout sample Notes References.png and WP:FNNR. --Tenmei (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I suppose they are both acceptable. However, most articles I have seen tend to have {{reflist}} under section titled "references". In the future I'll accept both forms. TYelliot (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've encountered the same thing; but only when there are no bibliographic reference source citations which supplement the inline citation notes. In other words, if the only sources are those captured by the {{reflist}}, then either "References" or "Notes" are likely to be used. In this article about a bilateral treaty, we find both inline notes and bibliographic source notes. I hope this helps clarify what I did not explain well enough. --Tenmei (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:Fb round2 2010 D-2 Pro League Playoffs CW

I am creating a standings combined standings table for the USSF Division 2 Professional League using Template:fb cl2 qr which requires that a template be made for each level of qualification in the table. There are 2 in this case, the playoffs and the conference winners. That template is for the conference winners. DemonJuice (talk) 18:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

If you'd like to see it: User:DemonJuice/sandbox/2010 USSF Division 2 Pro League Combined Table DemonJuice (talk) 18:42, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but surely you'd simply copy the links from each cell to the next, instead of creating a template. TYelliot (talk) 18:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

The documentation for Template:fb cl2 qr states that a new template must be created for each competition. I'd gladly do it without a template if possible. DemonJuice (talk) 18:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. TYelliot (talk) 18:49, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Momiji Dolls

I identified something on Momiji Dolls as vandalism (it's right at the top of the page) but I can't find it in the source code so can't delete it. Can someone explain why? TYelliot (talk) 19:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any obvious vandalism at the top of the page, right now; possibly you are seeing a cached copy?

Most likely is, one of the templates at the top there got vandalised - the notices about 'fansite' or the 'redirect' note or something.

If you go to this URL;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momiji_Dolls?action=purge

...and maybe do a 'refresh' of the page too, that should clear any cached vandalism.

If it's still showing, please use another {{helpme}} below, and tell us exactly what the vandalism is. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:50, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Rollback and reviewer granted

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I also gave you the reviewer right; see WP:REVIEWER for more information. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: September 2010

Why did you put me on blast for my edit, when User:Ozurbanmusic did the exact same edit as me and was not penalized for it?!?!?!?! Theuhohreo (talk) 03:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

The reason that I undid your edit is because it contains a rude word, and that your source is less reliable than the one the other user provided. However in the future I will post a message on the talk page of the article. TYelliot (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay so instead of blocking out the word, you undid the post and gave me a warning? and what could be more reliable than the tweet itself from the exact person who said it! Theuhohreo (talk) 14:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I admit that I should have only blocked out the word. TYelliot (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry!

I accidentally your whole edit... Looked like vandalism what with the word penis and shit that had nothing to do with the body. Guess the comparison really was ridiculous! Vistro (talk) 21:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Richard Dawkins

Your recent edit to the page Richard Dawkins appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. This is a biography of a living person. Please make sure your contributions are accurate and well sourced. Thank you - DVdm (talk) 22:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing my edit. I must have mistaken Dawkins' use of the word "splendid" as sarcasm as he often does in his many other works! TYelliot (talk) 22:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

However, he did denounce Lacan's comparison. Since this is cited information, I'll soon be adding it back. TYelliot (talk) 22:11, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem, erare humanum est :-)

Note that the shaded passages are quotes from the book. It is the authors who denounce Lacan's comparison. DVdm (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Quote from Dawkins: "We do not need the mathematical expertise of Sokal and Bricmont to assure us that the author of this stuff is a fake". Dawkins was referring to Lacan as the author of such "fake stuff". TYelliot (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes sure, he quotes the authors and then agrees with them. Have you read the book? Anyway, I don't think we need to include more citations from this review in the article on Dawkins. It says more about Sokal and Bricmont than it says about Dawkins. DVdm (talk) 22:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

This seems a good way to go in terms of expanding the article, as it certainly has the potential (like any other article) to become a featured article. Reviews as such tell the readers about his opinion on issues outside religion and theology. After all, he is more than just an atheist. TYelliot (talk) 22:28, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, these are his opinions on science and pseudo-science (and pseudo-philosophy) in general, but I don't think that the article should be expanded more in this direction, based on this single review. I think other contributors will object to specific examples or direct citations from it -- after all, the book and both the authors are already wikilinked, and reader can easily find their way to the review. Further expansion might be regarded as somewhat overkill. I suggest you propose expanding on the article talk page first. DVdm (talk) 22:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to User:LyingEyes...

You welcomed a new user for a Wikipedia:BLP attack? VictorianMutant (talk) 09:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I was surprised when I saw you put a level 3 warning straight away on the above user's talk page. Did he/she really deserve a "bad faith" warning for introducing his/her first article? TYelliot (talk) 09:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

When a new user right off the bat with their first edit attacks a person's integrity, adds more crap to the same page with their second edit, and then posts nonsense on both their user and user talk page with edits 3 and 4, it's really hard to assume good faith. They aren't here for any benevolent purpose VictorianMutant (talk) 09:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

From WP:AGF: This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of contrary evidence. VictorianMutant (talk) 09:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello TYelliot, VictorianMutant has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Wondergirls

You have to stop to delete The Wondergirls from the templates. The band was a side project of Gordon, Shuck, Leeuwen among others. Use the talk page if you don't want the band in those templates. You are wrong.--Talk Shop (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I apologise for my erroneous reversions of your completely legitimate edits. I thought The Wondergirls was the South Korean music group. TYelliot (talk) 18:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Cabau van Kasbergen

I'm sorry, I was meaning to recreate the article under the old name, since the person described is best known under the old name. I honestly did not know the difference between blanking and deleting, but I'll be more careful in the future. I'll proceed editing the article, now. --Olijven (talk) 18:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, errare humanum est! TYelliot (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user talk page! Wayne Olajuwon chat 21:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome; it's my job! TYelliot (talk) 21:40, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I know. :) Wayne Olajuwon chat 21:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks man for removing the personal attack, it seems the user likes to attack Minecraft as it seems he does not favor the game and is accusing the developer to have "problems". Anyways thanks dude, keep on fighting vandalism!--iGeMiNix/What's up?/My Stuff 22:07, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

and more Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar. This is my first anti-vandalism barnstar since I was given the rollback privilege back in December! Minimac (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Sindhis

You revised my 19:29, 30 September 2010 edit, I added 2 Sindhis to Bollywood and a few under others, their names clearly prove they are Sindhis, just click on the internal link, please look into it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.111.89 (talk)

I will be more than happy to accept your changes if you cite reliable references. Please see relevant guidelines about references on Wikipedia. TYelliot (talk) 19:44, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Here you go: http://www.thesindhuworld.com/famoussindhi.html http://www.sindhishaan.com/personalities/index.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.111.89 (talk) 19:52, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Wha?????

hmmm?--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 20:27, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was vandalism when I clicked the rollback button, but it turned out that it was a page full of fucks anyway. Sorry about that. TYelliot (talk) 20:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

haha. no problem, you make a good point.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 21:27, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Adam Federici

The first edit i made on his page was a mistake i originally wanted to create a new "career statistics" box for him but i was searching for a better template and then i didn't realize that i had already saved the page. Fair enough you can revert the first edit. But the second edit i made on his infobox is not vandalism at all! revert your own edit on it all i did was update his appearances at reading from 63 to 73. Look at his soccerbase profile to see for yourself. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.214.78 (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Contrary to your assertion, I cannot find any relevant details about the football player on Soccerbase. Please provide another source. Thank you. TYelliot (talk) 16:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

New edit

Hi TS Elliot. I also enjoy this author very much.

I am new to Wikipedia and I am sorry if I made a mistake with edits.

however there is bad error on the Arthur Penn page. That photo is of a different director.

Just use "Google Images" and you'll discover someone uploaded the wrong picture.

Thanks, Motionpicturegems (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)MPG

I have looked into it, and I also think that you are right. I requested moving or deletion of the picture on the talk page. Turns out that it's not a completely free image anyway. TYelliot (talk) 21:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Ntrpd76

Why do you keep posting delete requests for this user talk page? Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 10:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

An anonymous user created it with no useful message or content, so I thought we might as well leave it to the user to deal with his/her own talk page. Besides the user is very inactive anyway. TYelliot (talk) 10:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

hindu jihad article

Hello, Article Rescue Squadron invite. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue revised hindu jihad articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, hindu jihad and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue.total irrelevant data's in this article is removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.58.82.131 (talk) 05:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Accepting revisions

When you accepted this edit, a non-existent genre was introduced to the page and a sourced genre was separated from its references in so doing. Please check the effects such edits my have before accepting them. Cheers, Nouse4aname (talk) 13:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I have not accepted any revisions to this article. Have you mistaken me for someone else? TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 18:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

No. When I checked the edit history your user name was clearly beside the edit stating it was accepted by you. Since I have "unaccepted" and reverted the revision, you user name has been removed. However, it was certainly there before I unaccepted it. Just take care in future when accepting other edits. Regards, Nouse4aname (talk) 20:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mir Ali of Persia

Hi TYelliot -any chance of having another look now that I've attacked the article a bit? Grutness...wha? 00:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts to rescue the article. I have withdrawn the nomination. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 14:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

I presume this was an error? -- Rrburke (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The sentence was uncited anyway, and the place may well be Birmingham for the information we have at hand. I assumed good faith when adding that warning with Huggle. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 15:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I meant the warning to me. I was reverting a change by a vandal who had just inserted an EL to the village's fictitious wife-swapping club. That doesn't merit a warning, and I'm whitelisted anyway. -- Rrburke (talk) 15:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Nofootnotes

Hi, just a reminder that the {{nofootnotes}} template is not for articles that use some other referencing format (such as Harvard citations or parenthetical references). Per the template intstructions:

An inline citation is any system that associates a given piece of an article with a specific citation. The two most popular forms are clickable footnotes (<ref> tags, which produce numbered footnotes like this: ^[1]) and parenthetical references (e.g., (Smith 2010)). Other articles use manually formatted footnotes or embedded citations. Do not add this tag to articles that use the "wrong" style of inline citation.

Recently you added this template to Fourier transform, which is already quite well referenced using the {{harv}} template. I have removed it. Best, Sławomir Biały (talk) 18:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

CSD notification

Please don't forget to notify the creator of an article when you nominate for CSD, e.g. Seetharama servai--SPhilbrickT 20:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding me. There was a technical error on Huggle's part, and it didn't notify the creator. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 20:16, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem.--SPhilbrickT 20:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

ummm

Thanks for the warning when deleting all of my edits for the past two days. I was in the process of gathering sourcing information and adding a warning that you intended to delete my work would have been enough. There is a process for indicating that content is unsourced and the normal procedure is to place a flag on unsourced material rather than delete it all. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Washington_Campus&action=history If you have a problem with the work, please let me know, and I'll try to improve it. I'm trying my best to provide a useful site here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamboo Lake (talk • contribs) 20:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Do carry on with your work. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 20:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I really do want to make this a useful site, and I am not a pro at Wikipedia, so if you have any helpful advice, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamboo Lake (talk • contribs) 20:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC) I'm trying to use only 3rd party sources for all the material, but with some content, I cant find 3rd party sources. In these cases, can I use The Washington Campus website as a source?

Without 3rd party sources, the article will be very limited, as one must be careful when using information from an official website, which usually means that quite a lot of the information cannot be used. However, general information such as name and date of establishment, or info about what they do (be careful to avoid promotional information) is acceptable. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 21:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Almost all of the material is 3rd party. There were just a few things that I needed to get from the official website and they were generic things about what they do. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamboo Lake (talk • contribs) 23:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Deleting my edits

You have deleted the edits I have been working on all day for Endeavor (non-profit). All of the information I added came directly from Endeavor's own site and any information that was removed was removed because it was outdated. Please allow me to continue with these edits. If anything, these edits are greatly improving the entry and making it more accurate. Jd12568 (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC) JB

Whilst I agree that most of the information in the article is well referenced, the information that I came across with Huggle did not have in-line citations, so I acted according to WP guidelines and removed it. If the information is indeed from the official website, feel free to add it to the article with the appropriate in-line citations. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 21:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Having looked at your talk page, I'd like to remind you to be careful not to add any biased information to the article, as you may violate WP:COI. In fact it was your requests to change username which gave me the idea. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 21:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

TYelliot, thank you again for your comments. In response, I have dutifully spent today reworking the entry line by line to ensure that all info is backed up by direct in-line links/references including to sections of the organization's official homepage. If you find issue with any specific claim that you do not believe meets Wikipedia guidelines, please let me know what line/fact you are referencing and I will work with you speedily to provide appropriate reference. With regards to your point about possible bias, this had been resolved previously, and to make sure, I reviewed the post word by word as well as Wikipedia guidelines to ensure there are no biases or leading adjectives, etc. but only proven and referenced facts. (Jd12568 (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2011 (UTC))

I have looked at the article. It is indeed well referenced. However there are a few things which I'd like to mention. The section "Endeavor's Model" contains good detail, but the style is not Wiki-like. See Wikimedia Foundation or other articles on non-profit organisations for examples. Currently the section reads like an advertisement. Also the section Endeavor Entrepreneurs: Examples is rather confusing. I had no idea which table corresponds to which paragraph. I suggest you read WP:MOS for guides on tables, or at least fix the end bit where you had two paragraphs next to each other, and two tables at the top and bottom. But anyway good work. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 20:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Carly Craig

Hi TYelliot. I removed the A1 CSD tag you placed on Carly Craig because the context was pretty clear (to me, at least). She may not be notable (I wouldn't object to an AfD) but she is in fact an actress who's been in at least one notable movie, as the article states (or so Google and IMDB tell me) so "no context" wouldn't be an appropriate speedy deletion rationale. 28bytes (talk) 21:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed a quick Google search tells me that she is quite notable. So I wouldn't even nominate it for AfD. Thanks anyway. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 21:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jennie Wood

Hello TYelliot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jennie Wood, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being a published author is probably just enough of an indication of significance. Please consider proposed deletion. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 02:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Amadeo Theatre and Music Company

Hi Thank you a lot for your contribution to Amadeo Theatre and Music Company. Could you please check what I did and confirm whether it is alright or I should do something more? Best, Grunf (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Good references from third-party sources. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 08:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Cheers Grunf (talk) 08:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

On which page do I put the script? TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 18:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Special:Mypage/monobook.js or Special:Mypage/vector.js depending on which skin you're using. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 18:46, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

{{User:TYelliot/quote}}

Hi, if you have time, could you comment on today’s article for deletion: Price Theory: economics is mistaken? which has been rescued. . . Thank you, FC 19:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool

You cool with this? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

As a devoted Wikipedian, I am always glad to follow whatever consensus dictates. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 08:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Jumping the gun on AfD nominations

Hello TYelliot, I hope you are doing well! Thank you very much for your help at new page patrol and all the other good work you do. I did notice, however, that you nominated the page Ali İhsan Sâbis three hours after it was created by a brand new user. This may not have been the most helpful thing to do - please consider trying to improve promising new articles, not delete them, and perhaps keep in mind that it is in Wikipedia's interest to make new editors stick around. If that sounds patronizing, I'm sorry - you probably know more about wikipedia than I do! Anyhow, keep up the good work! : ) Thanks, --Cerebellum (talk) 12:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. My understanding is that articles that are not significant, but do make some claim of notability, don't fit it to CSD, but may be eligible for AfD. However I must admit that I did not find the two sources which you managed to find. Also, isn't the time given for a new page around 15 minutes, so the author has time to put some references in to prove its notability? Three hours are more than enough for a user to put some external links and refs. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 15:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I probably don't know more about Wikipedia than you do, seeing that you are much older :) TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 15:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing wrong with putting an article up for AfD - if it's notable, someone will come up with sources and it will be kept. I personally might let an article stick around for even up to a few days before trying to delete it, but it's really up to you. No big deal either way. : ) --Cerebellum (talk) 01:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Gadicherla Harisarvottama Rao

Hello TYelliot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Gadicherla Harisarvottama Rao, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article has been updated with additional information since tagged - Please pursue WP:AfD if notability is a concern. Thank you. Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 19:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Delete on Christopher Davidson

I removed your speedy delete on Christopher Davidson because in my estimation the claim of notability made by the article is sufficient to satisfy the lower notability standard of A7. However the notability at present is probably not enough to survive an AFD on the stricter regular WP:N grounds. Monty₈₄₅ (talk) 00:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Robert Mayer (political scientist)

Hello TYelliot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Robert Mayer (political scientist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Assertions of significance include being a proffessor and being a published author. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 01:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Broadway (Band)

The refences to user submitted reviews that were questioned have been removed, as has the material in the text. They have been replaced by refernced quotes from Forthesound.com, a professional reviewing site. Here is their job application section: http://forthesound.com/jobs. One quote from a user submitted source has been included, backing the albums positive reception by fans, but it is stated in the text that it is a user submited review. If that is a problem it can simply be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badman123234 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machan(film)

The article you sent to AFD,[1] has been greatly expanded and improved over the last few hours.[2] As your concerns have been addressed, I would ask that you now consider a withdrawal of the nomination. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

It was fun to turn that one-sentence stub into a decent article, and I thank you for the withdrawal. I have found the producer/director Uberto Pasolini's name in this and other places as a redlink, and I am surprised that no article yet exists... specially considering the awardas nd recognition he has received. So I am beginning an article on him. Within a few hours, User:MichaelQSchmidt/Uberto Pasolini will likley "go live". Best regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello TYelliot! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)