User talk:ThaddeusB

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

Welcome to my talk page! If you leave me a note here I will probably reply here, unless you specify otherwise or unless I feel it is important enough to "get your attention" via a reply on your talk page. If you came here to ask why I deleted (or took other action) on a specific page, please specify which article using [[article name]] somewhere in your message or else I might not be able to figure out what you are talking about.

Please note: new text goes under old text on talk pages. Thank you!

Click here to leave me a new comment.

For older conversations, please see my archives:


Any interest in a future bot collaboration?[edit]

I've been using the Paleobiology Database pretty heavily recently, which brought to mind our old collaboration to create a bot that would mass generate articles about prehistoric animals from its data. Do you have any interest in reviving our old project or starting a similar one in the future? Abyssal (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Abyssal: If you are still around and interested, then I am also interested in reviving our old project or something similar. I'm sure the guy who made life difficult way back when is long gone. (When you left this note last July I was just starting a couple month Wikibreak and I didn't see the note when I returned until now when archiving my talk page.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm definitely interested! Abyssal (talk) 16:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You![edit]

Articles for Creation Barnstar Hires.png
The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar

Congratulations, ThaddeusB! You're receiving the The Articles for Creation Barnstar because you got more than 175 points during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive in June 2014! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! (tJosve05a (c) 23:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Fabien Cousteau[edit]

ThaddeusB, just a friendly reminder that you still need to do three more QPQs for this nomination. It's been over a month since you posted that you would do them soon. Please do them as soon as possible—if it's going to be longer than a week, let us know and keep us apprised of your progress. I'd hate for someone to close the nomination due to inaction when it's this close to being approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

If you might...[edit]

You are invited to offer your two cents here. Schmidt, Michael Q. 07:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Fabien Cousteau[edit]

Thank you for the new content Victuallers (talk) 12:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mission 31[edit]

Thank you for the new content Victuallers (talk) 12:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Troy (submarine)[edit]

Thank you for the new content Victuallers (talk) 12:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Shark: Mind of a Demon[edit]

Thank you for the new content Victuallers (talk) 12:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter[edit]

The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:

  1. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
  2. Scotland Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
  3. Nepal Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
  4. Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
  5. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
  6. Florida 12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
  7. Colorado Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
  8. Canada Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. Herm Matty.007 (submissions), Ohio ThaddeusB (submissions), United States WikiRedactor (submissions), Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions), Greece Yellow Evan (submissions), Portugal Prism (submissions) and Bartošovice v Orlických horách Cloudz679 (submissions) have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 September newsletter[edit]

In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. Scotland Casliber (submissions), who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Team Barnstar Hires.png The Teamwork Barnstar
A barnstar to you for re-reviewing at least 25 user reviews during the WikiProject Articles for creation June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks for contributing to the backlog elimination drive!
Posted by (tJosve05a (c) on 08:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation

WikiCup awards[edit]

Awarded to ThaddeusB for the strongest contribution of in the news articles in the 2014 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 20:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Awarded to ThaddeusB for participating in the 2014 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 20:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014: The results[edit]

Flag of the Smithsonian Institution.svg
Flag of Wales.svg
Flag of Scotland.svg

The 2014 WikiCup champion is Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Scotland Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Happy November[edit]

Good to see you back a bit. Stay a while. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. It is certainly my attention to continue to contribute when I can. I have a lot on my plate, but I anticipate some of my (real life) extra work winding down soon, so I hope to get back into editing regularly again soon. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

BNA access[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 21:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello ThaddeusB. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Put The Article Back[edit]

The article linked together two related topics. I don't see why we should erase and entire article because it just might offend someone.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarkeyOrbits (talkcontribs)

I'm sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you please define "the article"? --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Space Dandy[edit]

Hey. You reviewed my article about the "Dandy" character from Space Dandy. You said that there has to be "sources talking about the character in a real world fashion"-I don't quite understand what you mean. Do I need to pull from sources that talk specifically about the character's impact and personality as opposed to articles that simply feature the character as part of the show? Exactly how many citations do I need? Thanks,Kinfoll77 (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

What I mean is the article needs to focus mainly on real world aspects of a character - if it is just in-world stuff, then the character is not notable enough for an article (which is the case for most characters). Take a look at SpongeBob SquarePants (character), for example, and you'll see there is very little description on character's in-world attributes/history and a lot about how it was developed, its real world impact, and so on. Now, that article is well beyond the minimum required, but should give you an idea about the type of material needed.
As to sources, they don't have to be specifically/exclusively about Dandy, but they do need to have significant material that is specifically about the character and not discussions of plot and such. Two sources with significant discussion is the bare minimum requirement. Sources with small amounts of info are good to fill in the article, but insufficient to prove independent notability of the character. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:30, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


Hi Thaddeus; I have mentioned you in passing in this AN/I thread. You are welcome to contribute or ignore it as you see fit. J Milburn (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)


With regard to this edit. Have you read Wikipedia:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant#Remedies? Why have you gone into an archive and made an arbitrary change declaring that a ban I imposed are lifted without discussing it with me first? Particularly as when this was a live discussion at WP:AN there was no consensus for it to be lifted. I offered to lift it:

I initiated the RfC on the moratorium, to counter the the argument presented here that is is an arbitrary action with no support. I would prefer to unilaterally lift the sanctions on GraniteSand, but GraniteSand you have to give a clear indication that you will not only follow DGG's requirement "[GraniteSand] is willing to accept not discussing renaming of this article anywhere on WP until the end of the moratorium, and not bringing an RfC on the matter or encouraging one." but in addition agree not to discuss the Moratorium anywhere on WP (or participate in the current RfC on the Moratorium -- If you wish to have your opposition to the moratorium noted in the Open RfC I will do that for you). -- PBS (talk) 11:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

To which GraniteSand replied

Lifting my topic ban while insisting that I not participate in the only subject I was an active in the topic isn't lifting the topic ban at all. ... GraniteSand (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

You have written on "GraniteSand's" talk page

I have lifted the broad topic ban. Note, however, that any discussion of the artcile title will be viewed as disruption and grounds for an immediate block until the moratorium expires.

The problem is that this is that you have only said that discussing the article title will be views as disruption, but you have said nothing about discussing the moratorium.

So where has "GraniteSand has agreed to abide by the mroatorium," and agree not to discuss the moratorium?

-- PBS (talk) 00:32, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I assessed the consensus per a request by a third party at WP:Requests for closure. Presumably you've already read my summary... All parties were in agreement - the topic ban had no meaning outside the article title. The two choices thus had little practical difference, but I chose the one I felt was better reflective of consensus... As I wrote on the close: "Any mention of the article title or moratorium on changes to it while the moratorium is in effect will be seen as disruption and a cause for a block." So, I don't really see any issue here. If GraniteSand causes further problems, let me know, or start an ANI thread. Until then, there isn't really anything to discuss. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:51, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
"All parties were in agreement" No they were not, the issue of discussing the moratorium on the article title had not been agreed as GraniteSand has refused to abide by that, and your wording does not stop GraniteSand from discussing the moratorium on the name of the article. If you thought there was a consensus why did you not first see if I agreed that was by asking me before closing an archived discussion because the "Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" general sanctions clearly state that ("Sanctions imposed cannot be undone by another administrator without approval of the sanctioning administrator ")? So how precisely did you asses that there was a consensus, because I took it that as the conversation was archived without agreement, there was no consensus? -- PBS (talk) 09:47, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I should have said in "rough agreement". There was a request to assess the consensus. I did. (The discussion being archived does not mean there was no consensus, only that there were no comments for a sufficient period of time.) I'm sorry you disagree with my conclusion, but I really think you are trying to making an issue out of nothing. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:50, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

17:11:57, 5 December 2014 review of submission by Punkish[edit]

Hello, I am one of the co-authors of this article. First, thanks for your review. Could you please tell us specifically which content you believe merits rewrite on account of impinging on someone's else's copyright? If we were to guess, perhaps you are concerned about the text we have quoted from various news articles. If so, would it help if we quote the text verbatim from those articles? As far as I can tell, that would constitute fair use.

Many thanks,

punkish. Punkish (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure, for example you write:
The Houston Chronicle tested the air in public parks, playgrounds and neighborhoods bordering some of the state's largest industrial plants and found the air in the Manchester area laden with toxic chemicals. The Chronicle collected air samples over the course of 3 days in Houston, Baytown, Freeport and Port Neches. The test was carried out with equipment used by plant workers to detect hazardous chemicals in the air, and the samples were analyzed for 18 toxic substances by the University of Texas School of Public Health.
whereas the original is:
The Houston Chronicle tested the air in public parks, playgrounds and neighborhoods bordering some of the state's largest industrial plants and found the air in the Manchester area so laden with toxic chemicals that it was dangerous to breathe. The Chronicle collected air samples on three days last summer in four communities in Houston, Baytown, Freeport and Port Neches. The test was carried out with the same equipment used by plant workers to detect hazardous chemicals in the air, and the samples were analyzed for 18 toxic substances by the University of Texas School of Public Health.
as you can see, there is very little difference between the two texts. Wikipedia can only accept original content - we cannot accept writing copied from other places. Please describe the study using your own words, not what the Houston Chroncicle wrote about their own study. (And likewise for the other material in the article.
If you have further questions, let me know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...[edit]

Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.

  • We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
  • In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
  • The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Victor Sahleanu entry[edit]

Hi, I am not very good with this Wikipedia process. I made a contribution to the discussion about the approved entry about my father. "Though I am not very familiar with Wikipedia's approval/deletion process I was surprised to read the comments above. "I do believe there's a slight chance Săhleanu may be notable" is a strange comment about a person that has (verifiably) authored 32 books. As ThaddeusB rightly observed "I'm not sure what to really expect from a non-English-speaking person who was active 50 years ago" to which I would add "in a Communist country isolated from contacts with the Western scientific world". Nevertheless I understand the need for additional independent references to Victor Sahleanu. I did some more research for such sources and I found this recent one , which would satisfy, I believe, the criteria to include my father's entry in Wikipedia. The page has versions in three languages, Romanian, English and French." How do I know if that is enough to satisfy Wikipedia's requirements / the people who asked for deletion? ValentinSahleanu (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I have replied at the deletion discussion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Crenshaw Communications[edit]

Hi there! I left a comment on the Crenshaw Communications page regarding possible deletion. Perhaps we can discuss? Thank you! Techieguy2012 (talk) 22:40, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Left another comment on the page! Techieguy2012 (talk) 22:12, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited An Awesome Wave, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matilda. 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) 11:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets![edit]

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello ThaddeusB, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
The Herald : here I am 11:41, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

You too! --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Xango. 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) 09:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

AfC-barnstar-remake.png The Articles for Creation barnstar
Keep up the good work in AFC Becky Sayles (talk) 02:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:25, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


Hi mate, you may have something particularly relevant to contribute to the AFD for this articles. Having raised it with you, I won't comment. Stlwart111 23:32, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikicup for MFD?[edit]

Wikipedia_talk:WikiCup#WTF.3F.3F.3F and below for context

They've not only dropped FP points, but they've pulled a rule out of their ass that means only one FP per article can count (a rule, I might add, that isn't even enforceable once you get FPs in more than one article: Either a coincidental same article costs all points, or it becomes largely uncalculable (imagine a nest of 200 FPs all in multiple articles...)

Has the Wikicup now become so divisive that MFD is the only option? Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Several decisions seem to have been made without regard for consensus. I'm not sure where to go from here. MfD would be pointless, there is no Wikipedia:Consensus review, and an RfC would be overkill. Perhaps an ANI thread? ... My preference is to give the judges a day or two to explain themselves first. If it does need to go to ANI/other dispute resolution, I suggest you let me right up the summary of the dispute. Your anger (while understandable) is unlikely to lead to a positive solution. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:27, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
If you don't mind doing that, I'd appreciate it. It's hard to not be upset when 99% of your contributions to Wikipedia are being attacked. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:10, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
They seem extremely unwilling to even respond. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:56, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
They killed the one per article limit, so that's something at least... I'll write up a summary of the dispute later today. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:39, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
(stalker) Please let me know if I can be of any help...--Godot13 (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Here's my angrier summary: Wikipedia_talk:WikiCup#FP_points. Quite simply, it almost doesn't matter what they do with FPs. I'm not joining after this, I don't think User:Godot13's joining, Diliff has shown no signs of interest, and Crisco 1492 has shown disgust at their behaviour. And Muhammad Mahdi Karim tried the Wikicup before, but I think he hit a problem with the all-work-must-be-from-this-year rule, I think because he has to do trips to get his photos, and the scheduling is a problem. In short, of the FP contributors who make their own content, are active on en-wiki, and have enough throughput to matter to the competition, I can't think of anyone they could possibly get to join after what they've done. At this point, their stubbornness is drama for drama's sake. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
And, y'know, had they gone in hard with a "FPs are valuable!" line, they might have been able to work forwards and have avoided the drama. But their half-arsed plans, with the vaguest handwaving of justifications (Oh, simulations, eh? With what data? What's your assumptions?) really need stomped flat at this point. Competence is required.
Can you do something soon? Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Yep, just got back on wiki after watching some sports and doing some "real work". I should be on this within a few minutes. I will draft something in userspace tonight and ping interested parties to sign it before posting on ANI tomorrow.--ThaddeusB (talk) 05:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Draft statement is at: User:ThaddeusB/Draft_Statement. Feel free to add comments/I agrees there, but try to keep it brief since it is already long. I'll post on AN sometime tomorrow, unless there are substantial objections against doing so expressed here. Ping potentially interested parties: @Adam Cuerden, Godot13, Nergaal, AmaryllisGardener, and Crisco 1492: --ThaddeusB (talk) 06:53, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't care about what you bring up at AN, but I would strongly oppose an MfD. --AmaryllisGardener talk 17:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
@AmaryllisGardener: If it comes to that - and hopefully it won't - you are, of course, welcome to oppose at the MFD, but I think that, at this point, that will only become necessary if this situation proves insurmountable, even after the AN post. But if the Wikicup becomes more of a detriment to Wikipedia than a good - as it is now threatening - then I don't see what other option there is. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Nobody needs to be so quick to just delete start talking about deleting the competition. Let's focus on solving problems now. If there are prizes (I thought there were, I'm confused though), take them out. If the consensus is that the new judges are the problem, get new judges. --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:56, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Hmm. Can't say I'm entirely surprised at the reaction so far - it has gotten pretty toxic, and the judges' refusal to discuss this has meant it's gotten way, way out of hand - but I am severely disappointed in the judges for letting it get this far. I would prefer to salvage it, but if it's to be salvaged, they need to get it back to a fun competition, not an opportunity to attack other people's content... Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

It looks like the judges' plan is to simply refuse to comment, and hope it goes away. Which is shameful behaviour on their part. All three have edited in the last few days. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:05, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Yep, it certainly looks like nothing will come of the AN thread. I certainly am disheartened that apparently for many people, if you don't like\care about something (WikiCup) then you don't care about consensus being enforced there either. The lack of comments by the judges is disappointing, but not surprising - they tried real hard not to respond even at the WikiCup page.
I guess there isn't really much that can be done about this year. Maybe we can get better judges/better rules for next year, but that's about the only hope I see for improvement. Of course you can try MfD if you like, but that is probably just pointless drama. At least you can take some solace in the fact that apparently the community as a whole has a negative opinion about WikiCup and competitions in general. And the one unilateral change (severely limiting article bonuses) is actually a very good step in the right direction. If we can keep that in place and get FPs up to 30 next year, it may just be the most fair year yet. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
After a year with, at most, a small handful of featured pictures, I think they might realize they screwed up exceptionally badly. Of course, I'm not sure that they'll have much luck getting people back. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Godot13, Crisco 1492, and Nergaal: Alright, if AN won't deal with it, how about we move to the Wikicup page and open a vote of no confidence in the judges, which, if passed, reverts the point scores to the consensus actually voted on? Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:04, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I'm just tired of the whole thing. If they want to change rules on their own, fine. Fuck 'em. The content is more important. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Maybe MFD really is the best plan... Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 launch newsletter[edit]


Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

George Billman‎[edit]

Do you have access to HighBeam? I just did a search and it looks like some useful articles in newspapers on your father, but I don't know whether people without HighBeam access can read them if I link them. --I am One of Many (talk) 23:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I do not. Citing sources that are not readily available online is not an issue, though. Just be sure to include the publication details and you are fine. See Wikipedia:Offline sources. (The BigFix guy is someone else, just to be clear.)--ThaddeusB (talk) 23:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The HighBeam sources don't really add too much accept that they establish the broader public interest in the late 90's and early 2000s in the potential benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. --I am One of Many (talk) 01:58, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure why the self-announced paid COI editor CorporateM is so intent on removing sourced content, but perhaps it is time to start a request for comment on whether your COI is violating Wikipedia policy in this article. I'm not sure how to phrase the problem because I don't understand the real reasons behind CorporateM's removal of content. --I am One of Many (talk) 16:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand either. He himself says he doesn't have any experience in the subject matter, yet feels entitled to remove things at random because the article "should be shorter". He also says the COI disclosure is a distraction that tends to bias people all the while pretty clearly editing with a bias against anything I write. I don't imagine there will be any content left when he is done.
And I don't understand what Jydog's problem is. He seems to be all bend out of shape about something, but I don't know what I could have possibly doen to upset him so much. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand it either. I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of COI policy on Wikipedia. I think there is not a good grasp how to source scientific content. CorporateM appears to want to keep the article slightly above a stub. That is not constructive and is moving into the realm of disruptive editing. --I am One of Many (talk) 16:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
what bends me out of shape, is that I am One of Many is not even trying to get consensus for proposed content before adding it to the article, and seems to believe that COI doesn't apply to editors if they are experienced. If I am One of Many will slow the down and not just swoop in and add whatever content Thaddeus creates - and allow an actual review of the proposed content to take place, it might be interesting to work on. But I have zero desire to work with a rubber-stamper who will edit war rather than discuss. COI is a big deal in WP, like it is in all scholarly endeavors. It matters. It is not fatal, but it needs to actually be managed. And rubber stamping is not management. I Am One of Many seems to have no clue about COI in WP- I have never seen him/her participate on the Talk page of that guideline nor at COIN. I have done both a lot and have edited the guideline itself -- I care about COI a lot. And i work on biomedical content a lot. And I would be happy to talk about the issues here.
The "rules" of COI editing are simple. You draft content and post it on Talk. You directly fix minor, noncontroversial things. That's it. The harder and more subtle aspect of it, is to always be aware that you see a world and have a view on that world (German Weltbilt and Weltanschauung) that are very different from other editors, due to your COI, and to make extra effort to really listen to others, and to work at the highest standards you can. And other editors look at your draft with careful scrutiny - not only what is proposed but at the shape of what is proposed.
The passion and COI are great for driving content creation; the review by others ensures it is really good quality. It can be a beautiful marriage if everybody recognizes it and plays ball. But when the person with the COI fails to understand what they are doing - writing things like: "My disclosure has indeed been a major distraction." (NO - the problem is ignoring the COI guideline, not your disclosure) and when other editors seem more intent on kissing the COI editor's ass rather than creating good content, the whole thing becomes ugly and stupid. Jytdog (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
and i really will walk away now. sorry for not sticking to that. Jytdog (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
It been a major distraction because I constantly have to talk about my COI, when I want to talk about content. Regarding editing the article, I appear to misunderstood your words and you appear to have misunderstood mine. I have already said I don't plan to make major changes to the article unless approved by others. And I will say it again: I do not intend to make major changes to the article going forward, unless it is obviously approved by others first and they simply fail to make the changes.
It would indeed be most helpful if all parties stop editing and start discussing. That includes CorporateM stopping wholesale deletion of material he admits himself he lacks the experience to evaluate its importance or lack thereof. Of course, only I am "obligated" to stop (and have), but if all parties could stop and discuss things other than my COI it would be most helpful.
And I really do desire your help, as I think your experience in medical article would be most helpful. I will honor your request notto post on your talk again, but I do wish you would consider helping at some point - perhaps after the tensions have cooled a bit. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
@Jytdog I realize I'm rather blunt in my actions and discussions, but I always cite reasons. I moved one major piece of content into the article and I gave justification for it. Since then, I analyzed the paragraph in detail to show that all elements meet Wikipedia policy. Keep in mind that consensus works both ways. You and corporateM don't have consensus either and I have reverted each of the major removals of text once because I recognize consensus is required. Now turning the the editing style you are demanding, that is simply uncalled for unless you can point out specific examples of where ThaddeusB's COI has resulted in clear policy violations. --I am One of Many (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't give a fuck about bluntness. I am blunt myself. Blunt and edit warring instead of talking is intolerable - i want to stay far, far away from you. Jytdog (talk) 22:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Let's be clear. I reverted you once here in good faith and I removed a COI tag here because ThaddeusB already announced his COI on the talk page. I removed a tag by CorporateM here and reverted a large removal of text here. I have been reverted twice by CorporateM here and here. So, the only way we are going to resolve this is by coming to agreement about what policies apply. --I am One of Many (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
One revert is not edit warring (WP:BRD) and I believe the only thing that has been reverted twice is the COI tag, a tag you (Jytdog) said could be removed if I agreed not to make substantial direct edits, which I did prior to the second removal. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Let's do be clear: "edit warring" is reverting without discussing to have his version of the article prevail -- at no point did I say 3RR violation, I said "edit warring". What is literally disgusting to me, is I am One of Many's edit warring to prevent COI management and actually defending that on the Talk page - and suggesting that we just rewrite COI. The combination of aggression and ignorance over something as serious as COI is terrible. I am One of Many is probably normally reasonable but in this case, got too involved in "the fight" to acknowledge that he didn't know what he was talking about. I know I got too angry to deal calmly. Anyway, Tryptofish is a great editor and is working with you guys now, and it looks like you are making progress. Good luck. Jytdog (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Not every revert needs to be explained on talk - the normal method of article development is through editing, reverting w/edit summary, re-editing, etc. Discussion is a helpful, and often necessary, part of the process, but reverting without simultaneously posting on talk doesn't make something an edit war. Was there an edit war here? I won't judge since I'm involved, but I do want to make it clear that reverting w/o discussion doesn't automatically constitute edit warring... Anyway, we have now moved on and are indeed making good progress on talk with Tryptofish's help. No hard feelings against anyone on my part, certainly. I understand people (myself included!) sometimes get upset, act too quickly, etc. and communication breaks down. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
@Jytdog I think it's important to keep in mind that different editors have different points of view and that arguments that may appear sound from one point of view, are not so sound from another point of view. There is no sense in going over the past, since I think the editorial process looks like it settling into workable and more friendly environment, which should always be the goal when disputes arise. --I am One of Many (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I am One of Many, your acting like some kind of misguided "knight" aggressively preventing reasonable management of COI is a bad thing and yes, that behavior disgusts me. You seem completely clueless about COI and the issues around it - you are like my grandpa running around telling jokes with the n-word. No. clue. how. wrong. Despite being told many times. And completely closed to learning. So I will just shun you. These are my last words here Jytdog (talk) 01:17, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I really had no intention to upset you or anyone else. I am sorry I upset you. However, you really shouldn't make such backhanded comments (such as above) to editors; it doesn't facilitate a good working atmosphere. Keep in mind that the real issue that is emerging with the article concerns WP:MEDMOS and the extent to which certain parts of the article may appear to be content forks, as pointed out by Tryptofish --I am One of Many (talk) 01:37, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost[edit]

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (banter) @ 10:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)


Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

...And, predictably, this is being made all about me, because just ignoring anyone else complaining makes for a narrative so much easier to dismiss. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 9[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
  • New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
  • Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Wikipedia Library and Persian Wikipedia" - a Persian Wikipedia editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Chris Holtmann
added a link pointing to Barry Collier
Gardens Alive!
added a link pointing to Burpee

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for George Billman[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 04:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 17:37:06, 16 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Juniper4053[edit]

On my article submission for the Ant's Forefoot: Articles for creation: The Ant's Forefoot

Hi there! I am an archivist for the University of Pittsburgh Special Collections and the copyrighted material in question is our department's finding aid for the Ant's Forefoot Archive. Because no Wikipedia article existed for this poetry collaborative, I thought it would be a great opportunity to both inform the public about the Ant's Forefoot, using materials from the collection and information from our finding aid and inform researchers of the existence of the collection as a possible resource. Additionally, I hoped that others interested in the Ant's Forefoot would eventually edit and/or add to the content.

The fall of 2014 the University of Pittsburgh Special Collections and Archives Service Center embarked on a project, editing and adding content to Wikipedia articles, as well as creating new articles, that pertained to archival collections housed at both repositories, in order to increase discountability of primary sources, included those that have been digitized and those that have not. For more information on this project please see We worked closely with a local Wikipedian (Sage Ross) in Pittsburgh who assured us that we could use the finding aids as content for Wikipedia articles,since we essentially created and owned those finding aids. Additionally, considering that Wikipedia frowns upon the the creation and addition of information based on primary sources, these finding aids are considered primary sources.

Because we essentially own the content within those finding aids, is it still frowned upon to use as content for the Wikipedia article? Nevertheless, I am in the process of editing the article, but of course wanted your opinion on this situation.


Jennifer Needham

Because the University owns the copyright to these finding aids

Juniper4053 (talk) 17:37, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Juniper4053, to use copyrighted information previously published (even your own) we need explicit permission. For more information, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. That said, it is always better to rewrite in your own words anyway as material won't be writing in an encyclopedic fashion if it was originally written for some other purpose.
To establish notability, you'll need coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. (Notability must be established to warrant an article.) Examples of this would be things like reviews of the publication in newspapers, magazines, etc. or people writing about the history of teh publication. --ThaddeusB (talk) 08:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your response and I apologize for any confusion on my end. I will edit the current article regarding what you have pointed out and resubmit for approval.
Jennifer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juniper4053 (talkcontribs) 20:32, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Novel Therapeutic Targets for Antiarrhythmic Drugs[edit]

Harrias talk 03:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Rochelle Fire Department[edit]

Hi. I am asking you to please strike your remark. Personalizing a discussion at AfD or anywhere else on Wikipedia is not helpful in any way. I am guessing you are a firefan, a hobby I find interesting and entertaining, altho I do not actively participate. I am a trainfan, a hobby that shares several similarities with firefanning. Biggest similarities are that they are both very detail oriented and both very much niche interests. There are not a whole lot of either of us.

I could spend 300+ hours doing research and come up with a comprehensive listing of every locomotive that has ever been assigned to New Rochelle, detailing out years, model, type of service, owner, etc, and write an article. I'd have busted my ass doing it, but you know what? It would still be cruft.

I don't think articles such as this are helpful; you do. That is fine. Please don't make a pissing match out of it. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 21:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

You chose to unnecessarily call someone else's work (not mine) "cruft", which is a synonym for garbage (as you may not have realized). I have no particular interest in fire stations, but I do find it annoying when someone chooses to put down another person's work like that. In the future, please just say something like "it's unnecessarily detailed" (which I agree with) instead and we won't have any issues... I wouldn't categorize my response as being personal, nor would I categorize your comment as personal, and certainly we are no where near a "pissing match". However, if my comment bothers you, feel free to strike the insulting part of your comment and I'll do likewise. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Linguist articles[edit]

Hi, thanks for your comments, they were much more helpful than the generic ones generated by Wikipedia. I've attempted to rewrite the Jane Simpson page at the Temp page let me know if I still haven't changed it enough.

I've also reworked Janet Fletcher's on her talk page There was less content here, so it was not so easy (there are also some parts, like indicating research interests, that are almost impossible to rewrite in a way that would be completely different, the only solution would be to remove them all together) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loztron (talkcontribs) 06:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Loztron. I have removed the copyvio templates form both articles, as I have no further concerns. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

CREST (Council of Registered Ethical Security Testers) page deletion[edit]

Hi, I wondered if you could reconsider your decision to delete the CREST (Council of Registered Security Testers) page. I understand this was done due to copy write infringement. I apologies if it appeared to read like the CREST website, however I did write both rather than copy one to the other so that is what they are probably similar.

I would welcome the opportunity to make any changes you suggest to get the page back up there. As a not-for profit accreditation body working with the UK government and Bank of England I think it is a shame for CREST not to be on wiki.

If it is easier I could take your suggestions and re do the page completely. I had tried hard to have citations for all the statements made and plenty of external validation.

Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allieand (talkcontribs) 16:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello. It more than just read like the CREST website; a majority of the text was word-for-word identical. In addition to the copyright problems this caused, it also reads as an advertisement for the organization. Either is sufficient grounds for deletion. Thus, you are far better off starting from scratch rather than from what was there. If you want me to retrieve the references for you, let me know, but the text isn't going to be of any use towards building an acceptable article.
If you do decide to write it, I suggest doing so in your sandbox or in draft space and then asking an experienced user to evaluate it before its moved to mainspace. I will be happy to evaluate it myself if you like, just drop me a note when ready. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

15:51:17, 27 January 2015 review of submission by Wolfgang Wimmer CZ[edit]

Hello Thaddeus, thank you for review. You declined my article because: too much history about Zeiss and no independent sources for history Carl Zeiss Vision. The history of eyeglass development and production at Zeiss (and also SOLA and AO) is the most important part of the history of the Carl Zeiss Vision International GmbH. I think, that compared to this the legal form (own company or integrated in the mother company), which can change very rapidly is not so important. And then the history of the mother company, which made a lot of compel is easier to tell. What would you suggest? DOZ is an independent German journal for opticians. I’ll try to implement more newspaper articles.

Wolfgang Wimmer CZ (talk) 15:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@Wolfgang Wimmer CZ: The point is that if the article is just a duplicate of Carl Zeiss AG, there is no point in having two articles. For the subsidiary to independently notable, it must receive coverage as an entity. Merely being part of the (obviously notable) company history is insufficient for a stand-alone article. If the history at the main article is current inadequate, by all means I encourage you to improve it, but the history section of the subsidiary should be about the history of the subsidiary, not the history of the company as a whole. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

inre Template:Did you know nominations/The Centrifuge Brain Project[edit]

2 QPQ's completed. Schmidt, Michael Q. 03:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Actua Corporation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Walsh (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) 09:03, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

RfC - Helper Script access[edit]

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Help editing[edit]

Im not the best formatter. think you could provide some tips if i find another source to site. How many more do you think i may need?

thanks. Molly :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magriffin117 (talkcontribs) 19:14, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

To prove notability (the standard for article inclusion) you need two reliable sources (e.g. newspapers, magazines, books, major websites with editorial boards) that cover the subject in depth (usually at least 2 paragraphs). Here are some examples: [1][2][3]
As to formatting, just remove all the bullet points and write the article using normal paragraphs and you'll be fine. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:10, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


Copy/Paste (feel free to remove)

"@Burntout123: - the article has now been speed deleted multiple times. If you wish to give it another shot (notability is possible, but needs to be proven), let me know and I will restore it to draft space for you so that it can be brought up to Wikipedia standards without the threat of quick deletion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2015 (UTC)"
Yes, kindly userify it, so that I can start working on it. Thank you for the opportunity, Will also place on your talk, feel free to delete. SamS.Burntout123 (talk) 03:39, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm assuming you no longer recommend that this be done, per this reversion. --Kinu t/c 05:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
It's being discussed at the ANI thread. I haven't made a decision one way or another. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your neutral position here. I have to admit that I have pissed off a number of WP editors by my careless comments on their "deletion to creation ratio" records, for which I am sorry. As a result, 2 potentially notable topics, "ExpertScape" and "Burnt-Out Diabetes" have been the victims. At this point and given my track record of antagonizing certain editors and in order to avoid further emotional reactions that may cloud judgments, I am happy to follow guidance and instructions of wise WP editors. The personality flaws of a user should not be a reason to disqualify or to speedy-delete any article. I am happy to work with you and other great editors for the next 4-6 months on the userified versions of these 2 articles. Thank you (please instruct if I should post this message on my talk page, incident boards, etc. Happy to follow) S.Burntout123 (talk) 20:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Offer made at your talk. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for amazing efforts and the balanced position and support. I have created a link and listed it under my ongoing projects for convenient access and been reading your instructions along with the educational discussions. At the risk of being labeled as overdemanding, is there any chance that the situation with the "burnt-out diabetes" project could also be better clarified? (also posted under my TALK)S.Burntout123 (talk) 05:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

James Burn Russell[edit]

I'm just doing a bit more work on this article now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soudania (talkcontribs) 05:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Awesome, much appreciated. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:27, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


Hello ThaddeusB Recently my wikipedia article was deleted I would like to know why? Because I officialy represent that person and I was told to make an article for her. If there are important steps that i should follow pls reply to me. In future i am going to add more articles about real living artists from my country and I kind of don't want to have any deletion problem cus this is kind of uncomfortable. Pls tell me how I must writ ethe article for it not to be deleted. Thank you Regards Tatev-22 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatev-22 (talkcontribs) 11:18, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

You didn't mention the article name, but I am going to assume you mean Varduhi Aleksanyan. That article was deleted because it lacked references. In order to protect living people from possible defamation, ALL articles about living people MUST contain references to reliable sources so that the information in them can be verified by interested parties. I restored the article in question to Draft:Varduhi Aleksanyan per your request at WP:REFUND prior to your comment here. For it to be moved back to mainspace, you will have to add references. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for how-to instructions.
You should also read our policies regarding editing with a conflict of interest if you are "officially representing" people. At the very least, I very strongly urge you to use article for creation instead of creating articles directly in mainspace. This will both reduce the problem with conflict of interest and greatly increase the chance that an article (once accepted for complying with community standards) will survive long term. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:16, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

article: Richard Herman[edit]

Dear ThaddeusB,

Thank you for your message explaining the problems with my first article:

( ) and offering to help me address the concerns.

I appreciate your office to mentor me on this process, and will commit to giving you timely responses.

thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewAmerica101 (talkcontribs) 19:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)


I didn't create any of those articles. I AWB'ed some talk pages. I did not create any articles. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, my apologies. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I created them because a few templates[4] were nominated for deletion. Nonetheless, I have restored about 18 of the articles that you had moved to draftspace and I have also checked a few other articles of mine that required expansion. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 04:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

You do realize an empty article (which most all of these are) are subject to A3 deletion at any time right? Moving them to draft space was being kind... You may want to check in at the ANI thread, as it is likely to end in mass deletion of the whole lot. In addition to the empty article problem, the few with content are copyvios (not your fault). --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I agree and I was also aware of this fact that they are subject to A3. After a while when I had started creating some of the years related articles, each of them had some data.[5][6] I had also checked ANI and I thought that it would be better if I invest the time in repairing these articles. I don't know why others were following the same path of creating articles without context, we know that I am not liable for that, it could be better if they were as fast in adding content. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 04:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I was familiar with your work and was near certain you weren't conspiring, but was wondering who got the idea to create this from who - likely the others were following your lead. And, the other two may well be the same person - there is a SPI to find out. I am definitely going to have to delete Jack's contributions with content as they are all copyvios. But, I will do my very best to make sure none that you've added content to end up on the deletion list when I compile it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Gardens Alive! for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gardens Alive! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gardens Alive! until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yoninah (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Reply to issues relating to me[edit]

This edit was done two years ago. I was still a new user and didn't know better, just so you know. Jackninja5 (talk) 11:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not a sockpuppet of the user. We really only have a similar interest. Also, I started creating the articles with content now. Jackninja5 (talk) 11:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Valentine Greets!!![edit]

Wikilove2 new.png Valentine Greets!!!

Hello ThaddeusB, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing,
 - T H (here I am) 12:15, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

A barnstar for you![edit]

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks for your contribution in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmad Keshvari. AliAkar (talk) 14:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Much appreciated. It is always nice to know that people appreciate what I do around here. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


Given your participation in some of the stuff that's been going on recently, you may want to consider watch-listing this, if you haven't done so already. Thanks! Ejgreen77 (talk) 15:21, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the headsup. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Walter Buckley (businessman)[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Actua Corporation[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Renee Bull[edit]

I have used a number of reliable sources to significantly expand and improve the Renee Bull article. I respectfully request that you review the article in its current state and reconsider your !vote in the current discussion. - Dravecky (talk) 03:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, thanks for the notice. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script[edit]

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDKTC 14:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Stephen G. Roszel[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Gardens Alive![edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 19:24, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Any particular reason for this? --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:28, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alex Cable, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sussex County and Freehold, New Jersey (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) 09:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Suvigya Sharma[edit]

Hello Mate

First of all thanks for your precious reply. It might be possible that link which i had supplied in the content might be looked like as a paid advertising. To be fair, its my not intention and i had kept links of news channel in reference.

If any links are promotional then i will remove them immediately. In fact i can remove all links from the page, if it violates Wikipedia Guidelines. I am looking forward again to have a great support from you experienced Guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atulkumar.1990 (talkcontribs) 15:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

  • @Atulkumar.1990: - the links (references) are not the problem; in fact, they are necessary. The problem with the article is that very little of the text is supported by references. Claims like he "has restored for many world famous monuments and historical heritages" must be backed by reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, books, etc. What you need to do is rewrite the article to only summarize what such sources say about your brother, and leave your personal knowledge of the subject out of the article where others sources don't contain the information. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


thank you very much for your detailed guidance. I will try to remove anything looks like advert but guess there is a misunderstanding here: that all her books are in Chinese language and this is an English profile, so I don't see anyone who read this English article will go to buy her Chinese books (especially all those books are only sold in China exclusively, and no oversea readers outside China can buy them at all--even if those English readers CAN read Chinese books), plus most of her Chinese books are sold out long time ago. That's why I was very confused where those 'advert' or 'promotion' ideas are from. I will try to delete some words, but if there is anything you or other admin think that will cause English readers go to buy her Chinese books, please do let me know and I will delete them. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emptynow (talkcontribs) 18:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Sadly, you chose to ignore my advice to use the Articles for Creation process in order to get feedback from experienced users and now the article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yilin zhong. You are going to have convince the community it is worth keeping now, as I am unable to override that process. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Again I am totally confused as I really cannot understand what you guys are talking about. Seriously I have no idea what to do or which sentence/part I shall delete to meet your requirement. I am not a wiki person and I even do not know how to leave comments at the discussion page, and that's why I have to come here. I just don't know what to do and I did ask for help, that if anyone of you can just revise or delete those parts where you think is not right.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emptynow (talkcontribs) 23:49, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Your inexperience is why I suggested you use the articles for creation process (i.e. draft space). I moved the article to draft, put the template on it, and told you to use the submit button when you thought it was ready. I don't think I could have been more clear. You ignored that advice and moved it back to main space, restoring even the incorrect capitalization. I cannot believe this was an accident or misunderstanding. It is not a problem, but you certainly purposely ignored my advice...
Anyway, what you need to do to justify the article's existence is provide evidence the subject has been covered by reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, and books in detail. This is what we can "notability" and is a requirement for all articles. It is not simply a question of "deleting" some offending sentence(s).
Sources don't need to be in English. Being sold on Amazon is nice, but it doesn't nothing to establish notability. Writing articles for a newspaper also doesn't count. Articles need to be about Yilin or at least her work to establish notability. If you can find such sources, please report them at the deletion discussion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Restoring the article "Stormy Atmosphere"[edit]

Dear ThaddeusB,

Thanks a lot for restoring my article: Draft:Stormy_Atmosphere

I will make the nesessary changes and resubmit it. Have a great weekend :)

Silverray123 (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure, no problem --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear ThaddeusB,

For some reason, my article was deleted again from my sandbox, before I had a chance to complete the changes.
Please help me with the issue, I want to finish the article and submit it.
Thanks in advance Silverray123 (talk) 15:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Wait :) Think I found it, guess I had an old link... Silverray123 (talk) 15:51, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Glad to hear you found it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

...for undeleting those two images. They can be deleted again under WP:F8. Kelly hi! 21:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Your welcome. Restored revision has not been re-deleted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


i cannot edit the page title MASTER KUMAR since it says it no longer exists — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saisundarlatha (talkcontribs) 05:26, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@Saisundarlatha: The page is now located at Draft:Master Kumar. You can edit it there. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I have edited the draft page to meet the quality standards of wikipedia, editing any personal exaggeration,I want to put up this article in Wikipedia and give a link to the article in the already existing wikipedia page titled Desadanam. kindly tell me the steps how to put the article up here in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saisundarlatha (talkcontribs) 08:08, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@Saisundarlatha: - I added an articles for creation template to the draft. If you feel it is ready for mainspace, click the green "Submit your draft" button and an experienced reviewer will come along shortly and make sure it is likely to survive in mainspace and either approve it as is, or tell you what needs to be done to fix it up. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saisundarlatha (talkcontribs) 01:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia email re signup[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter[edit]

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
  • New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
  • TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Stormy Atmosphere article[edit]

Good day,

I resubmitted the article few days ago, after all the relevant changes were made.
Adding the link to it:
Is it possible for you to recheck it, to save any further misunderstandings with other moderators?
I mean, I do trust the judgement of all official Wiki moderators, but my article was rejected few times and that makes me a little nervous :)

Thank you in advance,

Silverray123 (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Taking a quick look, it is likely to be declined due to minimal inline citations. You would stand a lot better chance if you incorporated the "external links" into the body of the article as sources. For example, reviews can be summarized in a "reception" section. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, thanks a lot!
But what do you mean by "reception" section?
Can you please refer me to some other article that can help me understand? Silverray123 (talk) 20:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I can't think of a band example off the top of my head because super notable bands have articles for individual albums. The principle is the same, though: reviews of the albums go in a reception section. Check out Rubber Soul#Reception as a random example. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Userfication of David Shankbone[edit]

Hello. Could you please userfy the David Shankbone article (AFD link) page to my userspace at User:93/David Shankbone? It was a reasonably close case, and I think he's gained sufficient notability and sources over the course of 6 years, now being called "arguably the most influential new media photojournalist" by PBS. 93 15:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - Five years is a long time, so certainly it is worth another shot. Let me know if you want any further help (such as evaluation before return to mainspace). --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

seeking guidance[edit]

Hi Thaddeus, thank you for all of your hard work in making wikipedia better. I'm fairly new to this and am working to help clean up wikipedia where I can. Your edit on Chithra Priya's wiki page made me wonder if I understand wikipedia's purpose incorrectly. Could I get your guidance?

I've been under the understanding that one of wikipedia's goals is to record true BLPs of note. When I looked at the Chithra Priya page, and did some research to try to improve the references, I realized a couple of things:

  • that the podium finishes to which she referred were actually not true recognized races, rather they were fun runs - the biker version of a rave, as it were.
  • the honda and other rides were also similar. It was like putting yourself in an encyclopedia because you like to take joy rides.

So I removed the items that I felt did not hold up to the WP:MOTORSPORT and WP:ATHLETE requirements for notability, in that these were not true races or sporting events. The problem was, once the irrelevant information was removed, there was no longer an article, hence I proposed deletion.

I realize that her profile could be seen as one who tries to inspire women in India to ride, but I could find no indication of her proactively promoting women's biking. It struck me more as personal advertising. All of the articles were about her and her rides, and I could see that the articles were lifestyle filler pieces (aka tabloid journalism - something mentioned in WP:RELIABILITY as not reliable). I know the Hindu, and Femina, and there is no true fact checking or quality control in the lifestyle pieces. There is no mention of wanting to advance women's biking, and she does no service to the community. By comparison, Deepa Malik, a true athlete who also has done an inspiring amount of work to help promote women's biking and safety in India, would be a true example of a legitimate athlete, and a true servant to women and biking. Interestingly, her good work in the community is not really noted in wikipedia; something I intend to help change. Please see the one reference in that article (Readers Digest) to learn more about the good that Deepa is doing in the community.

So I have a couple of questions for you and would very much appreciate your guidance:

  • Can you tell me why you feel that this page is notable and not the equivalent of encyclopedic entries of movie extras?
  • If you feel it is not worthy of deletion, should "podium finishes" and other casual rides be edited out for irrelevance?
  • If it is proper to remove non WP:MOTORSPORT WP:ATHLETE compliant content, what should be done with the article, if it should remain?

I very much appreciate your assistance. I am very new and I believe strongly in being an effective contributor to wikipedia. Tylerdurden1200 (talk) 03:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I will be happy to answer as best as I can... Outside Wikipedia, "notability" is a synonym for importance, but on Wikipedia it means something more like "was noticed". Thus, the importance of a person's accomplishments is only a minor consideration - in some cases they can confer notability (e.g. as outlined in NMOTORSPORT), but can never convey non-notability. The general notability guidelines can always make someone notable even if their (sporting) activities don't. Thus the fact that Priya was covered in detail by multiple sources that would normally be considered reliable, conveys notability. You could be right that these pieces are below average quality for the newspapers in question, but notability stands more on the fact that the paper took notice than whether it got every fact right.
As to article content, notability guidelines don't dictate content in any way. That is entirely up to editorial judgement. So if you think those finishes are not worth mention, then feel free to remove (or leave them removed). As to what the content should be, the general principle is that content should summarize what reliable sources have written. Taking a brief look, this would seem to include: 1) early life/how she got into biking; 2) what her career has entailed (not necessarily specific races, but certainly the kinds of racing she has done); 3) a brief bit on her personal life/social activism. If you desire further guidance or editing help with the article, let me know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Balboa Capital Corporation[edit]

Hi! Thanks for the ping on Balboa. I tend not to get involved in AfD discussions on articles I approved, so I hope you understand my not commenting there. It can appear self-serving, or a defense of my own capabilities. When I approved that article, I thought it might have an issue, since it was so thin, but I try to err on the side of the author, so as to not discourage folks. I've probably approved over 500 articles, and this is only the fourth that has been sent to AfD. I hope it sticks, but we'll see. Onel5969 (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Although my position is rather different (I feel an obligation to defend "my" articles), I understand yours. Thanks for your work at AfC - you are certainly right to err on the side of acceptance. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Thorlabs[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Thorlabs at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! czar  22:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Misuse of Admin Powers by Primefac for Personal Revenge[edit]

Hello, I would request you to invest only 5 minutes for this, definitely not more that. I am facing a serious issue on editing an article on English Wikipedia. Few selected admins such as Primefac, Kikichugirl, Kelapstick have taken up as personal attack against me. Now, I have blocked for editing and moreover the article created which was even approved on 5th March 2015, has been listed for deletion and I am totally unable to present my clarification on the same. The article for deletion and the block both has been carried forward by Primefac, Kelapstick.

Why So?[edit]

It all begin when I started creating an article on Shekhar Chatterjee on July 2014. I was newbie to Wikipedia so I was unaware of way of writing an article using references and tags on Wikipedia so I took the help of IRC where I came across Primefac on IRC and requested him to write an article on the same but he refused to do I so. I felt bad, but somehow I managed on my own. I was not a professional article writer so the article was declined several times, but I learnt the procedure to make the article follow Wikipedia Guidelines. Finally the article was created by Shirik, and the article was moved to article space.

Naturally, neither Primefac or anyone else is obligated to write an article for you. Not sure what the complaint is here.

Current Scenario[edit]

Within two days of article getting approved, with any discussion regarding the article on its Talk-Page the article was straight away listed for Deletion and that too by Primefac. The only thing that was unacceptable by Primefac was that I was Shekhar Chatterjee's father Sanjoy Chatterjee. Yes I am a honest person, I could have created an account with different username but I didn't because I believe being a father does not make a notable article non-notable. Each and every single point on the article has been given a citation and the article has been covered in the 3 most prestigious newspapers of the countr Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar, Divya Bhaskar.

As you realize, I have already stated on the AfD that I think the subject is notable. Acceptance at AfC is no guarantee that others will view a subject as notable. Your editing in draft space was not a problem, but editing in mainspace when you have a conflict of interest is very highly discouraged and mostly can only lead to trouble.

Few Fake Articles on Wikipedia[edit]

On the other hand, another article came to my notice of Sindhuja Rajamaran. This girl claims to have a Guinness_World_Records for becoming the Youngest CEO. Seriously? Did any admin made an effort to validate this title before getting it published. Note: Sindhuja Rajamaran does not have any Guinness World Record in her name which can be verified directly on [Guinness World Records Official Websites] and they fake claim still exist on Wikipedia!!

It was very unfortunate when I removed the false claim of holds a Guinness World Record for becoming which can be seen here [History] and also giving the complete description on it's [Page].

But I never expected that I would be blocked for disruptive editing and vandalism that too by Primefac. Really? Are you kidding me? Aren't there any other admin to validate? Are you taking a personal revenge? Did you validate the claim of Guinness_World_Records?

Wikipedia does not deal with truth, but rather verifiability. The article in question has a link to a reliable source that says Rajamaran holds the Guinness World Record. That is good enough for us. Removing sourced info is not appropriate. (Note also that Guinness only has a small percentage of the records listed online.)

Why Unfair?[edit]

Most importantly, the article has only two references and that too with no such thing specified World Youngest CEO in it. And on the other hand, article of Shekhar Chatterjee has been covered by India's most reputed 5 National Newspapers and 3 National News Channels and you still question it's notability and list for deletion?

I suppose Wikipedia is place for existing notable people and not for making people notable. Please correct if I am wrong anywhere. This article is notable enough for it's references in media and also completely acceptable by 2 very old admins User:Shirik and User:ThaddeusB.

It's only 1 admin User:Kelapstick and a user User:Primefac and a review user Kikichugirl that have problem with the article. The article being covered in 5 independent media in itself enough to prove it's notability. The only thing that is acceptable is rewrite of the article using a more better language. So what if I am his dad? I do object anything is wrong as in case of Sindhuja Rajamaran. I do accept if my point is right.

But now I suppose Primefac and Kikichugirl have decided to block me, so that I can't edit the article. I am definitely not complaining that they are wrong people but I would definitely abide them if they stop misusing their admin powers for personal revenge and take up this article on a neutral point of view as done by User:Shirik and User:ThaddeusB.

The reason you were blocked is you were disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. I don't know what you were hoping to accomplish by adding AfD tags to every "Name Chatterjee" article, but I don't really see how else it could be viewed other than purposeful disruption.

My Request[edit]

Your help would be highly appreciated. Please go through the article Shekhar Chatterjee once and let me know on my talk page if the article with so many references is notable or the one with only 1 valid references is considered notable. Sindhuja Rajamaran

Awaiting for your reply. Please do respond.

I have already given my opinion of why he is notable at the AfD. (talk) 08:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

See replies inline above... Your behavior has tainted the article to the point where AfD participants are unwilling to look past your behavior and assess your son's notability fairly. I understand that you are passionate about the subject, but your efforts are hurting your cause. Take a step back, relax, and let those with experience on Wikipedia (e.g. me) "fight" for you. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royalty Exchange, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BMI (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) 09:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Royalty Exchange[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to share with you my greatest appreciation for restoring our page. In the beginning it was an honest mistake on my part adding a sales section and a few other things that came off advertisement-oriented. I did what I could to fix that and appreciate you taking the time to restore what you could from the deletion for this article; we are very excited here at Royalty Exchange to be a part of Wikipedia. I do just have one question. For the 'Further reading' section, we do have some more recent media coverage/articles/press releases that were created about the company. Is it okay that I add those? I only ask due to the request that I not make too many edits. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JennyA12988 (talkcontribs) 14:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes, adding additional media sources (but not press releases) in the manner you describe would be acceptable. Just don't go overboard with it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


I have to say, I think you made several very poor decisions here: in unilaterally choosing to unblock without consulting either me or JimFBleak, in ignoring JimFBleak's original block, in ignoring my assessment of the account as a sockpuppet, and in recreating a clearly promotional page. I am also somewhat concerned that you appear to have abrogated responsibility for the account's future edits. I don't intend to take this any further, but I would hope that you'd review the difference between hard and soft blocks, and consider that we are generally expected to consult with the blocking administrator when undoing blocks that are likely to be contraversial. At the very least, it is polite to notify another administrator when you undo a block they have placed. Yunshui  15:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

@Yunshui: First, in regards to the edit linked above - that one is easy. It was duplicate text that I accidently left in when editing. If you take a close look at my full message, you will see the same text (or at least the same idea) in the body of the message. Let me be clear here - I am accepting responsibility for the account.
I understand you disagree with my decision. That is fine. However, I feel the user in question (if it is indeed the same person) has implicitly shown a genuine willingness to cooperate going forward, which is all that is required for an unblock. And like I said, I think the first block was too harsh - people over use "spamblock" for clear "softerblock" cases. As it happens, Jimfbleak is on wikibreak and protected his talk page. Naturally, I could have left a message anyway, but feel he would prefer not to be bothered. (And again, I am not convinced the two editors are the same person.) I will also point out that I was already dealing with WikiuserUK before you arrived on the scene, so I didn't just randomly decide to unblock. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
P.S. subtle trout noted. I will proceed more cautiously next time a situation like this arises. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Was I subtle? That's not like me at all...
I don't think we're going to see eye-to-eye on this, but that's okay; Wikipedia would be very dull if we all thought the same way. I apologise for the misguided "abrogated responsability" comment above and have struck it; I'm happy to trust you to keep an eye on this user. I should add that I most certainly don't see any willingness to co-operate from this user, implicit or otherwise; all I see is a complete lack of comprehension and a dogged insistence on getting "his" article back, but then maybe I'm just getting jaded in my old age. I wish you luck with this user, and though I'm sceptical, I sincerely hope that your decisions do in fact turn out for the best. Yunshui  15:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you, ThaddeusB, for this edit [7], a thoughtful alternative to my proposal for speedy deletion. Cheers, 2602:302:D89:A9C9:5DFF:2E39:8337:2C8E (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Why the deletion of Wisconsin International University College, Ghana[edit]

Please, why the deletion of Wisconsin International University College, Ghana when I sent a copyright donation to Wikimedia explicitely requesting to have the content here and that we own it. I even used my official email. So, I want to know what you want me to do again?

Thank you Salisiraj (talk) 15:00, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, being copyrighted wasn't the only problem with the text. It was written for a purpose (promoting the university) incompatible with Wikipedia's mission, so even if the copyright is released the text is not useful here. Additionally, we already have a page on the university at Wisconsin International University College with neutral text written by others. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, you are right, my mistake.
Salisiraj (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

You deleted a work in progress that wasn't up for review[edit]

I have been working on the Draft:Stentorians and it was in the area reserved to work on the project. The copyright infringement issue was not correct, as negroartist.htm is not the source of the material that you claim is copied. That site clearly stated the material is freely available and it was removed from the draft that was not up for review and the permissions pasted above to enable talk on the subject matter. it is difficult to follow the editors as various users jump in and claim to have the final say on deleting material when none seem to have any knowledge of the subject matter or little more than a bot's comprehension of just what is copyrighted and what is clearly in the public domain. The subject matter is history. No one can claim the rights to facts re: a historical review. Please restore the subject so that I can continue to edit and remove any references that do not belong. CaptJayRuffins (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with our license before you accuse others of not understanding copyright. First, the website in question (well the first website anyway - the text was copied from multiple sites) clearly states on multiple occasions "all rights reserved". It looks like whoever created that website took the text from other places to begin with and has no authority to release it under another license. Second, your statement on the talk page ("you are free to use this material in any constructive way. There should be no charge for the use of this material or any profit made from the use of it. For the most part it was freely given and should be passed along the same way. If you have material to add, or changes that should be made, please contact me at (email redacted)") is incompatible with our license which allows commercial use of material and doesn't require notification for changes. Third, to reuse text published elsewhere we need explicit permission from an official email - see WP:donating copyrighted material.
Facts are indeed not copyrightable, but text certainly is. Despite your insult, I do indeed apply "more than a bot's comprehension" to evaluate the situation. I am now the third experience editor that has looked at it and found it to be a copyright violation... You need to rewrite things in your own words - not copy and paste text from other places and change a few words. A copyright violation is not any more acceptable in draft space than it would be in main space. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Thaddeus, that has been the most clearly understood answer to the questions that I have been posting. I'd like to be in compliance, as most of the material for this has been spread over multiple sites, and it is historical, the one thing that eludes me in re-writing in my own words is the ability to then check the finished work against others like you editors seem to be able to do. If i could do that, then what I see as completed and you don't, wouldn't be out of sync. Is there a way to do this? (talk) 23:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

If you enable email on the CaptJayRuffins account, I will be happy to email you the contents of the article. To do so, click the "preferences" link at the top of the screen. The way the system works, your email will not be revealed to anyone who sends you an email unless you choose to reply to them. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:19, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Thorlabs[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Alex Cable[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


I rather dislike all WP formal procedures. This may sound contradictory from someone who was willing to be elected to arb com, but I ran because we do in some difficult matters need a formal decision, and I thought it a good idea to have someone participating in them who had a somewhat more skeptical attitude than those people who specialize in them. I can discuss further by email, if you like. DGG ( talk ) 16:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I have replied via email. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The Celebrity Source[edit]

If you're uncomfortable with blind reverts, why did you make them in the first place on my changes? You might have noted, if you'd looked at the article history, that I'd removed several items where assertions in the article were unsupported by the sources. I will remove those again, and I will thank you not to touch them until and unless you can supply sources which back up the assertions removed. Nha Trang Allons! 20:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

You really need to adjust your attitude. Wikipedia is not a battleground. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Suraj Gowda[edit]

The article names as Suraj Gowda has deleted by you. I had go through all your suggested links and I had understand the notability requirements. I feel the subject meets your requirements because I had mentioned all the verifiable evidence and also it's outside of Wikipedia as per notability guidelines. And he is a celebrity so also it's not a permastub. Our references are from good news sources and net blogs as mentioned in Wiki guideleines. So plz re-consider it and if is there any changes needed, I will surely follow and do the changes as per your suggestions.

Thankyou. Nakulmehra (talk) 06:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

@Nakulmehra: I didn't actually delete the page, although I see how you may have thought that form the log history. The page was moved to Draft:Suraj Gowda and then deleted from there because of a community discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Suraj Gowda. I can't unilaterally restore it because 1) I didn't delete it to begin with and 2) it was deleted via a community discussion. If you want the page back, so will have to file a request through deletion review. Say that you want the draft back because you think it can be improved and sources X, Y, & Z (be specific, with html links if possible) establish notability. Good luck! --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:20, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Robert E Love[edit]

ThaddeusB - Thank you for your feedback on my article on Robert E. Love. This is a learning experience for me. I will try to improve my sourcing for future articles. Lemchuhalik (talk) 13:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi ThaddeusB, Sorry I should've been alot more clearer, I removed this [8] as the bloke had put a heading above so on the AFD log it looked like a simple rant that didn't belong to any AFD at all,
Had I knew what AFD he was referring to I would've simply removed the heading as opposed to his entire !vote/rant ....whatever you wanna call it Face-grin.svg,
Oh the joys of AFD work eh Face-grin.svg,
Anyway thanks and happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 23:17, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

No worries and thanks for the explanation. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Re James McInerney article[edit]

Thank you for your message - very pleased if you think the article meets the inclusion criteria. I will happily revisit it and add more content - in a few days time, I hope this will be ok?

Best wishes Chris (Popstopher) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that would be fine - no rush on the improvements. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Draft:ePower Engine Systems[edit]

Hi, I appreciate your help with Draft:ePower Engine Systems. I did some more editing adding both references and links. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of references because the company is extremely small with only time for R&D for the most part. Anyway, if the references that I gave are not enough. I can add more about the trucking industry, but not sure about the company since I have to get them to update the website again. Anyway, I do appreciate the help. I am certainly not a writer. lol

Bob White — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kranki2 (talkcontribs) 03:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Much appreciated. What you've added looks pretty good. I'll take the initiative to finish it up myself within the next few days and move it to mainspace. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

List of African supercentenarians[edit] currently on DRV. You mentioned a week ago on WP:REFUND that you intended to take the article there yourself, so I figured you'd be interested to know. —Cryptic 03:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, as I likely would have missed it otherwise. I have commented there. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for admin input[edit]

Hi Thaddeus. I'm involved in a dispute about a page scheduled for deletion. It's becoming nasty. I think the internet can bring out bitterness and rudeness in people. Since you're an expert on deletion and I'm not, I'd be thankful if you could give your input. This is the article for deletion talk page Thanks a bunch! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperpencils (talkcontribs) 07:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I have commented on the AfD. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Re James McInerney (Poet)[edit]

Thanks Thaddeus, I have added a little more information and some new references and now submitted for reconsideration. Thanks for your help Best wishes Chris (Popstopher) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Popstopher (talkcontribs) 15:05, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Popstopher: Thanks for taking the time to work on the article again. I see the draft was declined again. All the advice given is good, but some of it isn't really relevant to the article being accepted or not. For example, being short doesn't really matter. If you are going to work on it more (and I hope you are), concentrate on removing unreliable sources (such as Good Reads) and finding more reliable sources if you can. I will try to help out with the formatting and such, and maybe on expansion too, sometime next week. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:44, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Yacenda[edit]


I have reviewed the above, and left recommendations for its improvement. However, as it now stands, it is not quite "ready for prime time". I should like to see this article succeed. My knowledge of Nixon's press secretaries began and ended with Ron Ziegler defending Watergate, so I found this article informative.

Georgejdorner (talk) 01:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, the article is now good to go. I did make a slight editing change to relocate a cite, but only to guarantee the article goes to DYK without holdups.

Georgejdorner (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

County HQ[edit]

Dear Thaddeus

My name is Dennis and a lawyer by profession. I have looked at your page and l have a correction to make. The county headquarter of Tharaka Nithi county is Kathwana and not Chuka.

You may consider amending your records accordingly so as to reflect the true position and not mislead the public.

Regards and congrats for the good job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@ I have no idea how you ended up on my talk page with this comment, but I have made the change. In the future, feel free to edit an article yourself when you see a mistake as Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Inventioning (band) reinstatement[edit]

Hi Thaddeus B!

I believe you were working with me on the page "Inventioning(band)."

I received a "soon to be deleted" email, but by the time I contacted Michael Lewis (founder of the band) for more information, the page was deleted.

May it be reinstated, or may I start a new one? Michael has a lengthy musical history and I didn't have access to the third party documentation until recently.

Looking forward to hearing from you, have a blessed Sunday,

Chuck Stack

CStack3 on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by CStack3 (talkcontribs) 19:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I see it has already been restored... For future reference, to avoid G13 deletion all you have to do is edit the page (and remove the speedy deletion tage at the top if it has got that far). --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Mike Hynson[edit]


This was the second time I tried to submit Mike Hynson onto Wikipedia, both times with no luck. His two partners in The Endless Summer, Bruce Brown and Robert August are on Wikipedia.

I have no idea what I've done wrong.

Please guide me because Mike deserves to be on Wikipedia. It would be much appreciated.


Donna — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Donna, our policy requires that all new biographies of living people have inline citations, not just general references at the end of the article. (You may see a few in mainspace that don't have such citations - they were grandfathered in when the new policy came into place.) This is due to a couple incidents where people created hoaxes about real people that went uncaught for a long time. That is, it is for the subject's protection.
So, to get the draft accepted you need to add inline citations by using tags like this: <ref>...</ref> See Help:referencing for beginners for additional information and feel free to ask me if you have trouble figuring it out. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:16, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Deleted content "Entermedia"[edit]

Hello ThaddeusB,

Yesterday I created an page under the name Entermedia User:Lentleka/sandbox/Entermedia. I know it has material from because it was me who originally posted it in that website.

I work for Entermedia and am really confused now. I either dont know how Wikipedia works and what I should write on it or I started it in a wrong way.

So I am asking you why u deleted the page ? Is it because you thought someone who is not coming from that company is writing the article ? Or I have to write an original article that is nowhere else to find ?

Just to let you know that was my first article in Wikipedia and I know I might not respected the rules but I want to improve myself so please let me know what wrong did I do.

Thank you Regards Florent Leka (lentleka) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

There are a couple of problems here. The first problem, and the reason for deletion, is that Wikipedia generally cannot accept text published elsewhere. Our license allows the reuse of text by anyone for any purpose; text published elsewhere is generally "all rights reserved". While you could donate the text you would have to follow proper procedure for that, and as I'll explain it would be a waste of your time.
The second problem is Wikipedia is an encyclopedia contain neutral articles about subjects that meet our inclusion criteria. It is not a host of "official pages" and writing about your organization is very strong discouraged. Even ignoring the COI, text written for other purposes (such as promoting your business) is not usable on Wikipedia because our purpose is different. Thus, even if the text was donated it wouldn't be used. Highly promotional text - such as what you posted - will be deleted on sight regardless of copyright.
If you insist on creating an article about your employer despite advice to the contrary, please use the articles for creation process where the article can be checked for neutrality without threat of rapid deletion as not as the article is not blatantly promotional. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi I am trying to edit the page for John J Quinn, physicist [9] which is flagged as 'orphan'. Quinn was the doctoral professor of his student Sankar Das Sarma who has a big entry. I tried to put a link to John J Quinn from [10] but the link does not seem to work! Please help. Thanks! Sincerely-Timir Datta — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timirdatta (talkcontribs) 20:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Fixed it for you: [11] --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk back[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, ThaddeusB. You have new messages at User talk:The Herald/Talkback.
Message added 05:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

need for an editor with tools access to look at a draft[edit]

I just put a draft up and need a bot to go over it for sentence trangressions. Since you deleted a previous work in [progress, I thought of you first for this.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:15, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Forgot the Draft name SheSheShe — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

If you reply in the talk for Draft: SheSheShe I'll be there.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Replied at Draft talk:She she she --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
You truly deserve this barnstar. You are very polite. Dormantos (talk) 06:54, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Invite to AFD Discussion[edit]

An AFD discussion is taking place at [| Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Suhas_Gopinath]. You are requested to go through all my comments and my views over this article. You are requested to present your views on AFD. Will meet soon. Dormantos (talk) 08:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Adam Yacenda[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for delaying[edit]

I'm writing back to your message delaying the deletion of the page under construction :

I appreciate it, Well, I've had trouble to find references that are acceptable to wiki. We are a small volunteer group, making this event happen and haven't Been extensively cited in paper media. Can you please help me understand what is acceptable to make this page go online ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felsel123 (talkcontribs) 11:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I would be happy to explain. I kept the draft article around because the festival has been covered by The Hindu and The Times of India, two excellent quality sources. If you rewrite the article to include only information that can be sourced to things found in this search that would go along way to making the article acceptable. Minor details can be sourced to an official website of the festival to flesh out the article. Most of the blog and message board sources that are currently used should be removed entirely - these sources are not what we consider reliable. Let me know if you have any additional questions. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Eastern Exchange - Deletion of Wikipedia page - Reg.[edit]

Eastern Exchange is one among the oldest exchange houses established in the State of Qatar (1979).

A new page created is seen deleted with remark - copy right violation. Infact the website has copied contents from our corporate website . Please visit us at or

I request that the webpage "Eastern Exchange" may be restored so that I can add value to the website for the benefit of General Public, Citizens and Expatriates of the State of Qatar in particular.

Thanking you

Baiju K C — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baijukc (talkcontribs) 16:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

@Baijukc: Material posted elsewhere cannot be used on Wikipedia. Whether the material be from a corporate website or a third-party is irrelevant - it is copyrighted either way. Additionally, even if the material was donated it would be of little use, as text written for other purposes is almost never suitable for inclusion in a neutral encyclopedia. If you are going to write an article, you should do so in your own words, summarizing what reliable sources independent of the subject have written. However, you should read WP:COI first which very strongly discourages you from writing an article for which you have a conflict of interest. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)



Another user has taken my file called File:Wnt-tooth.png and has listed it at Commons:Deletion requests.

This user believed that the licensing for the file was incorrect, however, I fixed it according to where I got the image from.

I was wondering if you could help me take it out of the deletion requests and if you could approve (remove any of the deletion or licensing tags) so it won’t be deleted.


Manpriya.A (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I am not a Commons admin, but the deletion discussion works the same way there. You'll have to reply & makes your case at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wnt-tooth.png, which you seem to have already done. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Raben Group[edit]

I take it you are OK with the redirect, then? Jytdog (talk) 23:50, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't really have an opinion on the article. I just became of aware of it because of an undelete request at WP:REFUND. Certainly, it did not seem like speedy deletion was appropriate and was probably an error due to not seeing the extensive talk page discussion at such. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:08, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
k, thanks for cleaning up after me. :) Jytdog (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Happy Easter![edit]

All the best! "Carry me down, carry me down; carry me down into the wiki!" (talk) 01:49, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, you too! --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


And FWIW, I wish you and him the best, and that the arrangement will be a successful one for all concerned. Ncmvocalist (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

@Ncmvocalist: No hard feelings going forward. I realize my words to you may have been unnecessarily harsh, just as I believe your words to Merinsan were. I am quite sure you are an excellent editor in general. Online communication is hard, especially when you when believe someone is in the wrong and/or not listening to you. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For you intervention in the mess which went on the Spoorthi article. And going the extra mile and taking the new editor, Merinsan, under your wing. Nicely done.Onel5969 (talk) 19:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

El Clasico[edit]

Half a billion, check. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Certainly the source says someone estimated 400-500 million people would watch. However, if you look at the actual viewership figures from Eurodata that simply isn't possible (i.e. the majority of the audience would have to be outside Europe, which is not plausible). At best, the figure is the number of people who would pay attention in some fashion - checking the score, reading a news article, etc. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok, well you asked for a reliable source, you got one. That you now wish to perform some original research to deny the source is your call. To suggest "(i.e. the majority of the audience would have to be outside Europe, which is not plausible)." is pure ignorance. La Liga has a global following, a bit like The Boat Race! By the way, I haven't seen any sources regarding viewership of the NCAA final, just a lot of claims. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
No, you are right. It's a reliable source that makes the claim and just like the Boast Race (which I support as you know) it's really hard to explain where the viewers actually come from to make up the alleged global audience figure. No one is doubting it is important and popular, just the precise viewership figure... As far as NCAA basketball goes, I can easily provide a source to show it is #3 in the United States - would you like me to do that? Global figures would have to rely on vague estimates, which would be equally as inaccurate as vague estimates for La Liga or Boat Race. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @The Rambling Man: I know you are not a huge an of the NCAA item, but any chance you'd be willing to post now per the rather obvious consensus? --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

ITN for 2015 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship Game[edit]

Jordan by Lipofsky 16577.jpg ITN for 2015 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship Game
Well done! It's been tough to get college sports on the ticker, with Europeans lacking knowledge of its importance and dismissing it as "amateur". You did a great job with this nomination! – Muboshgu (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. It took years of effort by myself and several others to explain the importance to the point where enough non-Americans were willing to support or at least stay silent, but it seems likely we are now at the point where it will be posted every year unless there is a substantial change in consensus... In about a month (I prefer not to do it on the heels of this year's nomination itself) I will do a thorough write up on the popularity of basketball in general and the importance of the NCAA tournament in support of an ITNR nomination to make it official that it gets posted each year. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
It will be posted every year because this is American Wikipedia. It's easier to get it posted year on year because fewer non-American contributors bother. You got your wish, job done, congrats. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
That assertion ignores the fact that some people who used to oppose now opine in support. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Not at all, the assertion is independent of that fact. Moreover, I am very pleased to see this nonsense posted as it will certainly add weigh to the posting of the Boat Race which is genuinely followed by tens of millions globally. Hurrah! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Good idea to wait. I'll support that proposal. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft article "Yasha Young"[edit]

Dear ThaddeusB

I have reworked the draft on Yasha Young which obviously needed rework. Thank you for your earlier review. My record in Wiki can not be compared to yours but you find my Wiki work in the German Wiki, as I am German. I am also a regular donator to Wikipedia.

If you have further questions, I will try to make this article work.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullitt1964 (talkcontribs) 10:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bullitt1964: Another user declined it before I got a chance to take a look... The article has plenty of references and the toen is probably fine now. However, there is one problem. I don't know about German Wikipedia, but on the English Wikipedia we have a rule that biographies of living peopel absolutely must have inline citations to back up facts and not just general references at the end of the article. I would also recommend removing unneeded references - having lots of unused sources just creates reviewer fatigue without adding any to notability. Two or three really good sources are better than two dozen poor ones. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool[edit]

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Mason Springthorpe[edit]

Hello, could you please restore the history of Mason Springthorpe prior to it being deleted at AfD. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 21:59, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Let me know if you need anything else. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:53, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome Message[edit]

Thanks, I'll check in with you if I have any other questions. Shiny Son (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey, what should I do here? Shiny Son (talk) 16:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
@Shiny Son: You of course should do whatever interests you. If you are looking for an easy way to get started, try picking an article that has been flagged for poor grammar and fixing it up (then remove the maintenance tag when done). Or maybe try improving an article flagged for using promotional language. Or one flagged for too few wikilinks (a wikilink is a hyperlink to another article and is made by adding brackets around the text like [[this]]). Wikipedia:Backlog contains lists of many other articles that need attention in one way or another - some things are easier to fix thing other.
You are certainly welcome to contact me anytime you have questions. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds good! If I run into any problems, I'll ask you for help. Are there any other good mentors here? Shiny Son (talk) 21:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, there are many excellent editors around. You may want to check out: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

refund follow-up[edit]


A short while back you had restored (at WP:REFUND) several articles for books by the same author which had been mass PRODed and, to me, looked to merit a closer look. I'm just now getting around to starting to work on them and noticed I must have left one out of my request. Would you mind also restoring Orientamenti? I can create a new request if that's more appropriate. Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

...And, prodded separately Arte Astratta, Posizione Teoretica. I've started redirecting those that I look through and don't find sources for to Julius Evola rather than delete, anyway.. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: I have restored both articles. Feel free to contact me again if you find others you want restored. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

An old idea I had that might help us warm up our audience[edit]

I had an idea for a bot a while back that should be relatively simple to make. The idea is that it would automatically fill out a template showing how well developed the articles in a given category are and paste it in each category talk page under the jurisdiction of a given Wikiproject. Since category talk pages are so much less visible than article space, making a bot like this could help earn the confidence of the community before our bigger efforts. I'll copy the original proposal below. What do you think? Abyssal (talk) 15:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Can anyone write a bot that could scan all the categories under the jurisdiction of a particular Wikproject, fill in a template like this along with a calculation for what percent along the way the category is to each article having featured status, then paste that template as a new section on the category talk page and in a new subpage for the wikiproject listing all of the newly generated templates, vaguely like the bot that does the popular pages template? I think a bot like that would be really useful for helping wikiprojects evaluate which categories are most in need of work and which could be most easily made into good or featured topics. Abyssal (talk) 04:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

This is an interesting task and the kind of thing that normally is approved fairly easily at WP:BRFA. Do you have any evidence that people in general would be interested in the output, or this just something you'd like to see?
As to the content creation task(s), I don't think it is necessarily an issue of trusting my programming skills (I have had multiple task approved, including one of the more ambitious bots on Wikipedia. There is a question of accuracy (our competence), but I think that is secondary. The main hurdle is a philosophical opposition to "useless" stubs being automatically created. The main key is thus to generate example articles that show themselves to be useful (i.e. have sufficient content). I did some searching and didn't find any stub creation bots approved recently, but did find some that probably could have been approved but the requestor ending up not following through.
So, which would you prefer to proceed with first? The "category stats" bot, or dive right in to figuring out how to get enough info out of a database to create a reasonable stub? I'm fine with either. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't have any particular evidence that people would be interested in an automated category evaluator. I assume it would attract the same level of interest as other means of tracking article development, but I guess I was mainly just curious myself. I don't have any preference as to what project we start on, so I guess it would be a time frame thing. If the category evaluation bot could be completed really quickly, then we might go with it. If it's a similar challenge to the article creator bot, we should probably just start with the latter.
I think it would probably be easy enough to get enough from the database for a good stub. Every taxon is going to have its authors, taxonomic affinities, geographic and stratigraphic origins, and age so that's four of the "five Ws" already and since Wikipedia considers all taxa notable the "why" is intrinsic. I had no idea you were behind WebCiteBot, btw. :) Abyssal (talk) 14:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I have another idea. It would be great if a bot could use mindat entries to fill out the mineralogy infoboxes and categorize them by date of approval/description Abyssal (talk) 16:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
That is actually a really good "trust building" idea - having the bot fill in existing infoboxes from a database. I think I am going to do the category idea, as I too would find such information interesting. After that, I'll tackling the mineral is a distinct possibility: it will require certain things, like permission of the site's owner, but nothing that seems unlikely to be obtainable. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Awesome! Abyssal (talk) 15:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for your comment re Günter Grass. Sca (talk) 00:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

ITN for 2014–15 EuroLeague Women[edit]

--SpencerT♦C 07:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

ITNR post[edit]

I also wanted to write a thank you to you for being far more clear than I would probably be had I attempted to write something similar. :) 331dot (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Ditto, it will probably help when NCAA basketball gets onto ITNR but I fear the Boat Race is doomed from so many ignorant (some deliberately) opinions. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks guys. When people think it is appropriate to call someone work that of "a 13 year-old boy with a fetish for muscular slavic women" just because they don't want sports on ITN, there is clearly something wrong. (Thankfully the comment was directed at me, who can just laugh it off and not an ITN newbie who would probably not return after such hostility.) It is unfortunate that this anti-sports attitude is being taken out on The Boat Race, although I am optimistic that it can yet be "saved", i.e. retained on ITN/R, (and in any case would likely pass future ITN/C discussions even if not on ITN/R). --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 Russian wildfires, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Viktor Zimin (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) 09:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Boat Race articles[edit]

"What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar.png What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
Hey Thaddeus, just wanted to say thanks for inspiring me. Your decision to create The Boat Race 2014 has led me, with the help of numerous other editors, to create the 160 other Boat Race articles and take them all to GA, and three of those to WP:FA. A labour of love, inspired by you. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank, but you deserve 99% of the credit. So, you finished them all already - very impressive. Indeed, this calls for a special barnstar creation... --ThaddeusB (talk)


Any chance you've seen anything to suggest a relation to Emilio Cantu? He seems to have a connection to Washington, so I think it's possible... Connormah (talk) 02:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I have not, but I will see what I can find. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Homaro Cantu[edit]

Those weren't run-on sentences, Thaddeus. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe not the best term for it, but regardless sentences with >2 largely unrelated clauses are a bit hard to parse so I prefer to avoid them. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Some DYK help[edit]

could you be kind enough to please review two articles which which I nominated? Template:Did you know nominations/High Orbit Ion Cannon and Template:Did you know nominations/Surin Elephant Round-up. I am new to DYK so can't do QPQ without credits, I would really appreciate the help. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I have taken a look at Surin Elephant Round-up. Its a pretty neat article, but there are some paraphrasing problems which need addressed. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sorry. I did not watch your TP and did not read this msg earlier. My apologies for that. Can you please be kind enough to guide me how to resolve the problems. I mean should I rephrase the said sections? give inline citations? or something else?. Any pointer will be highly appreciated. Ty again for the help and review. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 08:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I am currently checking these 2, would let you know under 24 hours. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 08:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
@FreeatlastChitchat: - You should always write things in your own words when writing on Wikipedia. Copying a sentence someone else wrote and maybe changing a few words is plagiarism and possibly a copyright violation too. So, to fix the problems I outlined with Surin Elephant Round-up you need to go through the article and change any sentences that are very similar to the source. The link I provided in the DYK will help in finding such sentences. (To be clear, I know when you started work on the article, there was already text there. Thus, it may have been a previous editor who caused the violations, but they need fixed either way.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
@ThaddeusB: and OccultZone I did the copyvio. Have a look see when you guys have spare time. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Surya Bahadur Thapa[edit]

Can you please copyedit it for RD? -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 05:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I should be able to get to it in a few hours. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Affective piety[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Affective piety you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hasteur -- Hasteur (talk) 12:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

ITN for Surya Bahadur Thapa[edit]

--SpencerT♦C 04:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

ITN for Lomekwi 3[edit]

--SpencerT♦C 04:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

2015 Boston Marathon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to National Guard
Moto (restaurant) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Flapjacks

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:24, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: SPI[edit]

While I admit you do have some good points there, I am actually not National Names 2000. I did stop copyrighting from Wikipedia articles (although I actually didn't know you couldn't copy from this site on another page on this site as I actually saw many articles with the exact wordings before) about last month. Also, on his 2015 in Djibouti page, I was sceptical to where he got the information from and asked on his talk page for a source, which he still hasn't provided. Jackninja5 (talk) 03:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, then let me apologize for my misplaced suspicion. NN2000 did engage in sock puppetry elsewhere, which unfortunately makes your coincidental similarity look bad. I am glad to hear you have corrected the copying behavior and understand how you might not have realized it was problematic before. I just regret that no one caught it sooner so that you wouldn't have wasted so much time on edits that ultimately had to be reverted. Good luck in your future editing. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
It is alright. :) Jackninja5 (talk) 03:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

need for an editor with tools access to look at a orphan[edit]

Louise Leonard McLaren needs a page patrol to relieve it of orphan status, can you help?


Mary C. Barker had an archive at emory university that yeilded every thing on the southern school but a photo of Louise. I would remove the orphan designation myself but IDK, is that allowed, for the editor of an article to remove such templates?

Robco311 20:54, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

The orphan tag refers to the number of other articles that link to Louise Leonard McLaren, not the quality of the article itself. Currently, the only incoming link is Columbia University. Are there other articles where it would make sense to mention McLaren?
And yes, any editor is free to remove tags that no longer apply at any time. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me, I think there are other links in the article that make this notable. Hilda Worthington Smith pioneered 'Workers' Education' at Bryn Mawr in 1921 and after the FDR administration declined to add dollars to the She-She-She camps in 37', instead putting the money into high school students; she was given the Workers education service, which the administration saw the value of. This was her goal and she ran with it. So the link to HWS pays off with the title of Workers' Education, which links the two, along with Affiliated Schools for Workers (1927–1939), HWS had integrated the summer schools up north, this wasn't possible down south at the time and those were the schools LLM did in the mountains of Appalachia. Remember, the big bugaboo back then was poor people mascarading as 'commies' and demanding handouts. HWS ran a soup kitchen in NYC after initiating night classes for the black gardeners and kitchen staff at Bryn Mawn and she had strong ideas, but for a woman, putting these ideas out was just carrying a sign that said "Troskyite!!" Workers' Education, if you read the life philosophy of HWS, wasn't a socialist issue, it was a women's rights issue, but at the time it was labeled in the media as socialist, leftist, pinko or any of the sobriquets they choose to tag it with back then because it was a women's issue.,, Contemporary Adult Labor Education Journal and teacher and the whole labor movement of the Workers educational bureau of the CIO, now known as the AFL-CIO.

I didn't know how to add the references into the story but they are all there, did I miss something... Wait, maybe I did the edits after... HWS is the catalyst behind worker' education, which the unions backed and is the basis for unionism today.

Thanks, I will remove the orphans template, can you do the page patrol?

Robco311 01:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

The orphan tag referred solely to the number of incoming links, so no need to argue for notability. Something can easily be notable and not be linked from other pages. When you added this link it was then appropriate to remove the orphan did.
As to page patrol, that is only needed for new pages (to take them out of the new page queue) and pages under special restrictions (to make the changes visible to all). On number articles, such as this, there is nothing to patrol - changes are accepted for all to see automatically. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Cleared it up for me. Kewl. Robco311 03:05, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bob Brown (newspaper publisher)[edit]

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Valley Times (North Las Vegas)[edit]

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Per this -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 07:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Stephane Graff Article[edit]


Thank you for your feedback on my first article. I have left a comment on this articles entry on the articles for deletion page, including links to scans of source material and auction results. I'm sorry, I was unsure how to email you Directly.

Best wishes, A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A De Lacy (talkcontribs) 09:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

About the orphan designation[edit]

I am wrinkeled about the orphan designation here on this article.. The Stentorians, which is one of the few describing black fraternals incorporated during the integration fights of the 50's... I see links all over the place ane was about to take down the template, but paused as I don't know if I missed something. I would defer to your greater experience and would ask if you are in agreement to the orphan tag.... Thanks CaptJayRuffins (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The orphan tag refers to the number of incoming links (i.e. links from other articles), not the number of links in the article. Using the "what links here" button found on the left hand side of the screen show that zero articles currently link to The Stentorians. If you wish to de-orphan it, what you should do is find related articles where it would make sense to mention the group and add some relevant material that includes a link. List articles are an especially easy target for this. For example, List of general fraternities. Generally, an article is expected to have incoming links from at least two article to be considered de-orphaned. Let me know if you have further questions. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Intertranswiki[edit]

Hi. In 2009 you joined up for the wikiproject Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki. The project has since ceased activity but is currently being given a kick start due to its importance and the coordination needed to translate content from other wikipedias. If you're still active and are still interested please visit the bottom of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Intertranswiki and add a {{tick}} by your name within the next week so the project can do a recount and update. Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

2015 Badakhshan landslides[edit]

Will you be able to nominate this article for DYK? --George Ho (talk) 08:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no reason it shouldn't be accepted on ITN. I don't know what the heck is up with ITN voters lately, as we have never rejected a similar story in the 4+ years I've participated in ITN, and other stories that I am sure would have normally been accepted have been rejected as well. I don't get it. It's like people want the template to constantly be a week+ out of date. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Rather than wait, can you do it anyway for DYK? --George Ho (talk) 18:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
One has 7 days to nominate something for DYK, so there is no rush. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Its clearly not going to make ITN. I'll nominate for DYK within the next few days. Of course, you could help a busy man out by nominating it for me if you want. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:44, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
But I don't have a QPQ. I must review one nomination. --George Ho (talk) 03:05, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Wait, maybe I have one. --George Ho (talk) 03:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


Good call on Nepal, I missed that. Stephen 02:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

No worries, glad to help. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Userfication request[edit]

Can you please userfy Blue Waffle to my userspace I have a AfC passable article in my sandbox this hoax is notable I would like to compare histories per WP:PRESERVE. Valoem talk contrib 02:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The old article was entirely about a non-notable album. When the AfD started, someone added a single line saying it was also a hoax disease and linking to [12]. As such, there is not anything worth restoring. If you want me to delete Blue waffle to make way for a page move and/or to promote the sandbox draft, let me know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, I will not need that, can you restore the full history and talk page to Blue waffle, I am going to paste my version on top and have history restored. Valoem talk contrib 16:50, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I restored everything but 3 revisions that consisted of a copyright violation and a request to delete it as such. There is no real history on the talk page, just a random (unrelated) comment, so I didn't restore it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter[edit]

C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy) is a long-period comet discovered on 17 August 2014 by Terry Lovejoy; and is one of several Featured Pictures worked up by India The Herald (submissions) during the second round.

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Belarus Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Funeral strippers[edit]

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
  • New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
  • Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

ITN on wikcup[edit]

Can we claim wikicup points for getting the Derby up for ITN? I posted a question there but haven't seen an answer. Figured you'd know. Don't want to claim points if not eligibile to do so. Montanabw(talk) 02:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Yep, it's eligible. The only reason I haven't claimed it yet is that I've been busy and updating my Cup article list is a low priority. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hyalinobatrachium dianae[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

WebCiteBOT status[edit]

Hi, User:WebCiteBOT is not currently running, as I see. Did you manage to fix problems? I just know that very similar bot - ru:User:WebCite Archiver (in Russian wikipedia) was stopped in December 2013 because of limitations on number of archived links (no more than 10 links per hour). Do you experience the same problems? --Andy pit (talk) 23:13, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think I fixed the problem. I need to run a big test set to be sure and carefully review it. I haven't had time to do that yet, so that is why it is stopped. I haven't encountered any limits - I think WebCite's owner gave me/my bot special permissions to send unlimited requests way back when, but I don't recall for sure. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Hey TB, how is this looking? I've been archiving hundreds of links manually over the past few years so it was exciting to hear your bot exists but sad to hear it's down. Do you need help with testing or is there anything else we can do? Also is there perhaps some kind of parameter or category we can add to a page to invite the bot over, rather than it just going off of newly added URLs? – czar 22:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


Just a friendly note; "wikt:worth" (see ITN) is not a predicate nominative in English, only a noun or a verb. The proper adjective would be wikt:valuable. μηδείς (talk) 07:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

2015 Badakhshan landslides has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

DYK for D-CON[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hal Holbrook question[edit]

Hey ThaddeusB! I was wondering if Hal Holbrook were to die (and I hope he won't because he's my favorite), but if he were would he be notable enough and his article is in good shape for a RD tag in the Main Page? If not, what can I fix? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I doubt the spelling.[edit]

I am not sure but metagnome on the Lokiarchaeota article isn't spelled correctly. Is there any template to mark it/ flag it?
Please ping {{ping|Acagastya}} for reply. (talk) 01:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

@Acagastya: It looks like someone fixed it already, but to answer your question {{Verify spelling}} is probably the template you were looking for. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cheryl's Birthday[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:01, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Visual Collaborative AFD responses[edit]

Hi Thaddeus, I hope you are doing good. thanks for the response on the AFD Visual Collaborative talk page: references and responses have been added. Kindly re-evaluate and rfc, thank you, blessings. Mnanonymous (talk) 17:30, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Moto (restaurant)[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 18:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cnemaspis adii[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 18:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

need an entry evaluated[edit]

It was speedy deleted for (i think, notability) not for citations or links, can you advise? I think it was the all caps... — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeeCeePhoto (talkcontribs) 02:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Arthur “Smokestack” Hardy Robco311 01:56, 14 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeeCeePhoto (talkcontribs)

It was deleted (actually moved to User:BeeCeePhoto/Smokestack Hardy and then the to its current draft location) not due to lack of notability, but failure to assert notability. A subtle, but important difference. That said, I believe the deletion was not in accordance with policy - the article cited at least one reliable source at that time, which in my book is always a valid assertion of notability.
As far as actual notability goes, that appears to be established as well (now)... The heavy use of pictures as citation is pretty questionable. If you took these photos yourself, I would suggest uploading them to Wikimedia Commons and putting some of them in the article. If not, I would suggest leaving out information that relies on a picture for a citation, or if it truly obvious, non-controversial info (likely if it can be backed up by a simple picture), then no citation is really needed. Since Winner 42 has already express a desire to help, I will give him/her a chance to jump in before I offer any further advice. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@BeeCeePhoto: In this case, I think the use of some of pictures can be treated as primary sources. The pictures themselves are not important it is what they are pictures of. The plaque of for the Arthur "Smokestack" Hardy fire station is probably one of the best examples as it shows that a fire station was named after him. Though I would cite it as a plague rather than a picture and preferably I would find a news article discussing the fire station. In general though, the pictures should be uploaded to Commons and put inside the article. Winner 42 Talk to me! 14:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, I will attempt to do that.Robco311 (talk) 15:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

ITN for AOL[edit]

--SpencerT♦C 07:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you![edit]

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg Thanks for nominating the Peter Gay article. That was my first ITN! TeriEmbrey (talk) 14:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for 2015 Badakhshan landslides[edit]

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 07:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

It is wrong to claim she was queen of Sparta. That is most probably something following Gorgo after the adaptation of the character in the film '300' which was totally misleading from that of the historical character. The article must be renamed and the term 'Queen of Sparta' must be removed. There was no queen, princess or any other formality regarding the wife of a Spartan King. Also a Spartan King had nothing to do with a king as we know him in medieval European history. Sparta had always two Kings who were descendants from two old noble families. After the state and laws reform of Lycourgos these two families were left providing the state with two Kings who in Greek are termed 'Vasileas' meaning the one who pulls/leads the people. One King was always staying in Sparta commanding a part of the army that was not going to battle while the other was leading the army outside of Sparta in campaigns. Their roles where exchanged in regular basis. Thus kings where more or less no more than the supreme military commanders of the state, something like a modern army general. Their wives had no formal names.

(gisvlasta, 11 Feb 2014) Article and title remains despite you useless editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@ - I haven't the slightest clue what you are talking about. I think you placed your comment on the wrong person's talk page. Certainly, this has nothing to with the mudslides you put your comment under. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit-warring, insults, and "original research"[edit]

I was puzzled to read your advice to the editor Dawn2000, telling him/her to avoid edit-warring with a malicious editor and to "revert once or twice, then move on -- someone else would have restored the categories soon enough if they are important." That is simply untrue, as not all WP articles are well monitored, and malicious "bad faith" editors can wreck the integrity of an article if you don't challenge them. In a recent experience, an anonymous editor (blocked once in March for edit-warring and on warning in April) decided to revert a sourced historical date in an article I monitor. He/she said the primary sources (in the article since 2003) were "incorrect", but did not supply one new source for his/his date using the Julian calendar. He continued to delete a sourced date, berated the primary source (an encyclopedia) as "written by a nature reserve worker," and told me on the talk page to (quote) "STFU". I looked at this editor's other contributions, and they are similar: petty disputes, insults, refusal to compromise, and breaking every rule of Wikipedia decorum. Despite all complaints, WP administrators will not intervene further, allow him/her to continue, and have decided he can edit several articles per day, often adding 1500+ characters of "original research".

My comment is not about this editor, but about your comment: English Wikipedia (unlike German and French Wikipedia, where I also contribute) has a very libertarian approach to anonymous editors; depending on the admin, malicious editors can continue to sow mischief, edit-war, and pretty much ruin an article with POV/OR nonsense. For you to blithely advise another registered editor like me to just "move on" is the reason so many leave Wikipedia and come back as unregistered editors. And why should I bring that anonymous editor to WP's attention when he will (at worst) be blocked for a week, then assume yet another IP username, while I will be the one advised to cease and desist? I realize WP administrators are busy with many things on their plate, but I find your advice appalling.Mason.Jones (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The article in question was high profile and well watched. The edit warring was extremely LAME - it was about whether or not the article belonged in a (non-controversial) category of the type "event in country" or not. Thus, both parties were equally guilty of edit warring - and neither party was acting in bad faith. It was a simply disagreement. The registered editor in question was lucky I only gave him advice instead of blocking him for knowingly violating the edit war policy. Being "right" is not a justification to edit war whether you are registered or unregistered. Period. We have numerous proper methods of dispute resolution and they should be followed.
I have no knowledge of your situation, but your complaint about the situation I actually acted on is way off base. In the general case, IP editors are blocked just the same as registered editors - for a length of time appropriate for their history. (I.E. Repeat offenders get increasing longer blocks.) A registered editor would never be blocked indefinitely for a content dispute, which appears to be what you want for an anonymous editor. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I thank you for the response (and the "LAME" link is great). English Wikipedia still suffers from a lack of administrative oversight, and many admins indulge the whims of malicious anonymous/IP editors. As a manuscript editor in my past life, I'm always amused by WP tags asking editors to "copy-edit and clean up this article." When you do, sound grammatical fixes are reversed, U.S. spellings in articles about American cities/people will be "corrected" to British, and sourced facts will be replaced by unsourced POV. English Wikipedia is a mess, and I think many English WP admins could learn a few things from their colleagues over at German Wikipedia.Mason.Jones (talk) 17:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Of course all of the things you mention do happen from time-to-time. However, incompetence rather than malicious intent is usually the cause. For example, someone "correcting" an American spelling probably simply does not know any better. I know when I write about Brit-Eng dominant subjects I often make such mistakes despite a conscious effort to not do so. Things such as ownership issues where people revert grammar/formatting fixes are much more likely to be from experienced editors than anonymous/inexperienced ones. Certainly many anonymous editors and newly registered accounts are acting in bad faith, but those are usually caught quickly and stopped. The long-term abusers (who go through many accounts registered or otherwise) and bad-faith user who slips through the cracks are the rare exception, not the rule. That's not to say we couldn't do better, but I think the picture you paint is not an accurate representation of the usual experience. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh, come on, Tad[edit]

Do you go by and can I call you Tad? In any case, I make the brewery mistake all the time. μηδείς (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

To answer your question, I normally only go by Thaddeus in real life. I am not familiar with the term "brewery mistake", but if it is a reference to "admired" instead of "admitted" it was pointed out in good fun. Certainly, it is a mistake we can all make from time to time. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


Nominated 2015 Preakness Stakes for ITN. May need some help with the blurb... [13] Any assistance welcomed! Montanabw(talk) 03:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bouvier's red colobus[edit]

Harrias talk 12:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lee Ratner[edit]

Harrias talk 12:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for EGS-zs8-1[edit]

Harrias talk 12:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

2015 Colombian landslide[edit]

Can you spare some time here? -The Herald (Benison)the joy of the LORDmy strength 17:48, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It's on my agenda which I hope to get to this evening. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Oscar Holderer[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Oscar Holderer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I've left my comments there as well. Mkdwtalk 04:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Please see new note on DYK nomination template. Yoninah (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Murder of Andrew Pea[edit]

Hi ThaddeusB,

Many thanks for your timely involvement in the "Murder of Andrew Pea" deletion debate. Your unequivocal support completely altered the tone of this discussion.

Very best regards,

Danny Ropis (talk) 01:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Happy to help. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Isla San Telmo[edit]

Is there still some problem with this Template:Did you know nominations/Isla San Telmo?--Nvvchar. 16:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


Hey, it's been a while since I heard from you. What's up? Abyssal (talk) 06:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I've been busy and haven't moved forward with the project yet. Hopefully very soon, I'll find some time to work on it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Looking forward to it. Abyssal (talk) 17:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for I Wish My Teacher Knew[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bernarda Gallardo[edit]

Harrias talk 07:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


ITN/C awaits you for some comments. Personally, can you help me out by updating some of my noms? Thanks..-The Herald (Benison)the joy of the LORDmy strength 09:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I took the weekend off. I'll see what I can do today... --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Oscar Holderer[edit]

Harrias talk 19:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Homaro Cantu[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Synageva[edit]

Your help is appreciated Victuallers (talk) 09:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Kentex slipper factory fire has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Disambiguation page Max Reinhardt[edit]

Hi! Max Reinhardt (disambiguation) has this note: "18:35, 6 August 2009 ThaddeusB (talk | contribs) deleted page Max Reinhardt (disambiguation) (Expired PROD, concern was: Unnecessary page, hatnote on primary page to only other entry)" See also Talk:Max_Reinhardt_(radio_presenter). Thanks! Bjohas (talk) 10:06, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Claudico[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Claudico at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Brightview Senior Living; I would like to revise, please.[edit]

Hi Thaddeus. I see that you deleted Brightview Senior Living in March. I would like to revise the submission, if possible, and was instructed to contact the deleting administrator. Or should I start from scratch? Thanks in advance for your assistance. Best regards, Shs123 (talk) 17:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Claudico[edit]

Thanks for helping with the main page Victuallers (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

  • Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
  • Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
  • Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
  • Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.
Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Follow up on MIT at The Wikipedia Library[edit]

This is just a follow-up to check the status of applications for MIT Press access. There has been no action for a month so I wanted to know if the program is still active. Thank you for your time and efforts at The Wikipedia Library. JbhTalk 10:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, ThaddeusB. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

JbhTalk 15:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: Sorry about that. I've been away from the Wiki the last several weeks due to unforeseen circumstances. Now that I'm back, processing the Library applications is at the top of my priority list. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the update. I hope all is well. Cheers. JbhTalk 15:20, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi Thaddeus. Do you have any thoughts on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:38, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
  • Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
  • Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
  • American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Affective piety[edit]

The article Affective piety you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol oppose vote.svg; see Talk:Affective piety for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hasteur -- Hasteur (talk) 16:21, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ira Lujan[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Ira Lujan".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 19:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 11:37:15, 19 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by PCMorphy72[edit]

Hello ThaddeusB,

About the reason why you declined my article submission Draft:Men On The Border you stated:

"What you can do: Add citations to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject."
(see it on my talk page: User_talk:PCMorphy72#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Men_On_The_Border_.28December_23.29)

Recently the draft has been deleted because it was considered “abandoned” for 6 months, but today I’ve received an useful citation that could help to accept the submission, so I ask you if it, using your words, “improves the submission referencing” sufficiently and “adequately evidence the subject's notability”:
(there is also this article in the printed edition of the Swedish newspaper: ,
as well as this further article published online some day after that one: )

PCMorphy72 (talk) 11:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Kultivera[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Kultivera".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:C. K. Thornhill[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "C. K. Thornhill".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 September newsletter[edit]

The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.

In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Scotland Casliber (submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was Philadelphia Coemgenus (submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.

The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

  1. Belarus Cas Liber (submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
  2. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
  3. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
  4. Somerset Harrias (submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
  5. Washington, D.C. West Virginian (submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
  6. Somerset Rodw (submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
  7. United States Rationalobserver (submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
  8. England Calvin999 (submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.

The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.

Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Matthew Perkins[edit]

Hello, ThaddeusB. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Matthew Perkins".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 10:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to subscribe to the edit filter mailing list[edit]

Hi, as a user in the edit filter manager user group we wanted to let you know about the new wikipedia-en-editfilters mailing list. As part of our recent efforts to improve the use of edit filters on the English Wikipedia it has been established as a venue for internal discussion by edit filter managers regarding private filters (those only viewable by administrators and edit filter managers) and also as a means by which non-admins can ask questions about hidden filters that wouldn't be appropriate to discuss on-wiki. As an edit filter manager we encourage you to subscribe; the more users we have in the mailing list the more useful it will be to the community. If you subscribe we will send a short email to you through Wikipedia to confirm your subscription, but let us know if you'd prefer another method of verification. I'd also like to take the opportunity to invite you to contribute to the proposed guideline for edit filter use at WP:Edit filter/Draft and the associated talk page. Thank you! Sam Walton (talk) and MusikAnimal talk 18:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I think the new WARx2 Wikipedia page was deleted earlier today without following proper Wikipedia rules and guidelines.Katymall (talk) 19:55, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
  • Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
  • Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
  • Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)