User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2010/3

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Updated ADPH entry

Tim, I updated the entry for the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH). Will you please review it and provide feedback at your convenience? Thanks, Jenn JPSumner (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)JPSumner

Follow-up

Sorry for the lapse in protocol. I have requested permission from NW directly to quote or confirm my earlier statement re: email unblock correspondence. Wiki libs (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

SPI

Congrats, you're a full clerk. Only difference you'll notice is that you can now take on trainees! ;-) Nathan^T 00:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that's fast. Thanks! Tim Song (talk) 03:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

Thank-you for answering my question posted at your RfA. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 14:44, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It's time!

Keegan would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Keegan to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tim Song. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

AFD's

Since you are closing them and putting the merge tag on them, I would like to know how we are going to merge totally unreferenced information Space_Age_Bachelor_Pad, Acid breaks. They may have sources listed but they are useless sources if you ask me. Ridernyc (talk) 10:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

If there is nothing reliable sourced to merge, just redirect them. Tim Song (talk) 10:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool that was the plan but since I'm the one who sent them to AFD didn't want to just do it myself. Ridernyc (talk) 12:01, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Kissle

It looks very nice... I'm an Administrator on the Simple English project, I would be interested in using it. can it be adapted to other projects? Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 21:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

p.s. I'm a Linux user. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Currently I have no plans to port it to other projects. Although technically it is certainly possible, it requires some quite substantial changes. In addition, I don't know if it works on Linux. Tim Song (talk) 22:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I have little doubt that it would work on Linux. As long as the user can use Wine, it'll be fine. SmokingNewton (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

SUL

Hi,

Your request has been granted. We could have blocked that account as well. Popo le Chien ^{throw a bone} 09:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations

Well done. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Darn, I was beat. :) Oh well, you're now an administrator. You may want to have a look at Administrators' how-to guide, Administrators' reading list, and the New admin school before you get started. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Congratulations! (X! · talk) · @896 · 20:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I'm very relieved the "content" objection failed to derail your RFA. Congratulations! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Yup, congrats. Let me know if you ever need help with anything adminy. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Congrats on getting the mop. Also on earning a place here -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to add my congrats as well. Best wishes and happy sysoping! Wine Guy~Talk 20:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations. ÷seresin 20:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
The cabal grows.... ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations. I was very proud to be your first "strong support". Those self-absorbed narcissists who voted against you were really starting to piss me off. They failed to appreciate your exceptional contributions, and more importantly, your potential to be a great sysop. I know you'll do a fabulous job!--Hokeman (talk) 00:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Remember these words of wisdom:

You will always protect The Wrong Version.
Make sure to assume good faith and please do not bite the newcomers. You know when you are following both of these guidelines diligently when the person you're applying them to is a vandal, spammer, troll, and/or sock puppet.
Be sure to use clear and concise language when talking to other users.
When you delete something, people will complain.
When you choose not to delete something, people will complain.
When you make a big block, people will trash you, beat you, demoralize you, and drag you through the streets on a rail. And then complain.
Remember that there is no cabal.
Don't delete the Main Page.
Don't block Jimbo. Blocking him only makes him mad.

–MuZemike 20:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Congrats Tim. If you haven't already taken a look, Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts has a good number of very useful administrative scripts that you should be sure to get. NW (Talk) 21:34, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Congrats from me too! If you need any advice/help, feel free to drop me a line :) Ged UK 12:51, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Now that your RFA is closed...

...here's your mop. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Tim, thanks for unprotecting Allstarecho's talk page, semi-protecting Talk:Danny Dyer, and blocking the abusive IP related to the latter. You're my new go-to admin for any kind of problem! ;) Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

"Tim song"

By the way, this account is now globally locked so no one will be able to impersonate you on any wikimedia wiki. -- Avi (talk) 16:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Tim Song (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Need clarification why Loren Ridinger wikipedia page was deleted

Hey. We posted a Wikipedia entry yesterday for Loren Ridinger, the Senior Vice President of Market America -- she owns the company together with her husband, JR Ridinger. In the post, you noted that we were violating a copyright for marketamerica -- please clarify what corrections we need to make and the best practice to get this page up. Thanks. You can reach me at 336-544-6343.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Loren_Ridinger%22

--Nataliadz1 (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Rock People

Hello! Please undelete this article for the purpose of merging and redirecting per WP:PRESERVE. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'm willing to undelete if it is redirected. If there's any attempt to revert the redirect, I'm going to protect it. Is that acceptable to you? Tim Song (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is perfectly fair and reasonable. Thank you for being open-minded and understanding. It is much appreciated. One last note, it might be worth adding a link to this discussion to the Afd close just so as to note confuse anyone with why it was undeleted and redirected. Thank you again. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Done Tim Song (talk) 17:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you once again. I redirected them to the specific section of an article that discusses these two characters. Have a nice afternoon! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Your deletion of User talk:Sarsaparilla

[1]. This was a user page of a controversial user, currently banned. The User page still exists. Why the talk page was redirecting to that deleted game article, I don't know, I never noticed it, but there would have been, at one time, plenty of discussion there. Vandalism? As a non-admin, I can't access the page history. Could you possibly restore it to the state when it was last a user talk page, with or without appropriate blanking for such? Otherwise important discussions may be lost or obscured unnecessarily. Normally, a user talk page wouldn't be deleted without an MfD, though sometimes admins will administratively delete them. AfD should have no bearing on this. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Restored. Script fail. Thanks for letting me know. Tim Song (talk) 18:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:DrippingGoofball

User talk:DrippingGoofball is requesting unblock. Are you sure you wanted to restore all those links to a single sales site after reading the edit summaries? Perhaps you'd want to negotiate a better edit summary and an unblock, as I'm sure spamming wasn't the intention. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I would like you to reconsider this block and your reversion of all his edits. As an editor very familiar with the articles involved, I don't see any problem with what DrippingGoofball was doing. He was replacing a link believed to be bad with various different replacement links. To block him for spamming suggests to be me that you have misinterpreted his actions. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I misinterpreted the situation. My apologies. Tim Song (talk) 21:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

In that case let me be the first to say it: You are abusing your admin powers!!! Expect a lengthy rambling post at ANI about how much you suck any minute now!!! Beeblebrox (talk) 23:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

*Runs franticly to ANI and looks* Nope, not there yet. *relieved* Tim Song (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Sunday, March 21

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Day NYC, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Lights Camera Wiki, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example User:ScienceApologist will present on "climate change, alternative medicine, UFOs and Transcendental Meditation" (see the November meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back. And if the weather is good, we'll have a star party with the telescopes on the roof of Pupin Hall!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Chace Watson SPI

Hi Tim, I hadn't found commons:Category:Sockpuppets of Chace Watson until now, there are 30+ socks there. I only just started looking through them, and several have been active here on en:wp (some are already blocked here, many are not), others are sleepers. Should I go ahead and add all of those usernames to the SPI, or is that unnecessary? Cheers. Wine Guy~Talk 18:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, add 'em and I'll block 'em. Tim Song (talk) 18:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I think I got them all (I'll double check though). That should help to break-in your new button. ;) --Wine Guy~Talk 19:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Your babel

Works on Google Chrome but not IE7. In IE7 it's not visible. Please consider tweaking it. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Mupplan

You were blocking admin on the last report, so just letting you know that WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Mupplan has been reopened.—Kww(talk) 15:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

The benefits of 3RR

Thanks for closing some cases at WP:AN3. There should be an official badge to be given out for your talk page, with something about 'rotten tomatoes' on it, to reward those who have the patience for this, ahem, challenging task. Good luck, please close more! And congrats on your RfA. EdJohnston (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

cfcuk

Hi

Refering to the decision to endorse the deletion of the cfcuk Cheslea fanzine page, I feel that a merge with the Chelsea FC page would fly in the face of what the cfcuk fanzine is all about. Each edition of the fanzine has the legend "Carefree, Blue tinted and 100% independent" printed on every front cover so, for the Chelsea FC page to have a section featuring the cfcuk fanzine would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Unfortunately for me, noone at Wikipedia who have endorsed the deletion of the cfcuk page seems to have any knowledge whatsoever about the matchday experience of watching a Cheslea match as the cfcuk fanzine and its sellers are well known amongst both the home and away Cheslea supporters and are considered by many as an essential part of the day. Again, I have to question why several other club's fanzines have been allowed to remain within the Wikipedia pages while the cfcuk Cheslea one hasn't. Hopefully, for a factual tool such as Wikipedia, I sincerely hope it is not a simple case of tribalism...

Blueblagger 16:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueblagger (talk • contribs)

Appeal for Brews

Hello Tim,

I was wondering whether Brews should appeal the present block directly or appeal the namespace ban itself (or perhaps both)? I think the argument is really about the namespace ban itself and it could be (but I could be wrong here) that an appeal of a ban for violating the namespace ban would then be rejected if in that appeal you cannot raise objections to the namespace ban, only if it is applied correctly. Count Iblis (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Put on your flak jacket for chapter 3,500 of the Brews Ohare saga. Seriously though, I don't think Brews can be unblocked at this point without either permission from ArbCom or a clear consensus based on a community discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Bruce Lee

Thanks, I was trying to bring a semblance of order to that page, but I think they'd just end up edit-warring over anything else, anyway...maybe a week will get them to cool down and work on consensus.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Please restore Worker-communist Party of Kurdistan

Hi Tim! I noticed you closed the AfD on Osman Hajy Marouf and the Worker–Communist Party of Kurdistan.
Referring to the party there was only one keep-comment but no support at all for deletion. This is really few feedback for an AfD relisted twice, but in any case no consensus on deleting has been established. Also, it seems to be quite easy to find more reliable references to this. I therefore ask you for restoring just the party article. Thanks, PanchoS (talk) 01:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Done, note that this does not preclude an immediate relist by any editor. Tim Song (talk) 02:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm certainly aware of that it might be relisted – in fact that's fine for me. Regards, PanchoS (talk) 10:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Your re-listing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Masthay

Hi! I'm coming to this as someone who's familiar with and respects your work at AfD and on Wikipedia generally, so please don't for a minute think I'm imputing bad faith. But would you be able to explain why you re-listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Masthay on March 8? At that stage the discussion had three participants, being the nominator (delete) and two other participants (keep), one of whom provided an incredibly large amount of significant reliable sources apparently establishing notability. From my perspective, it would have seemed that you could have happily closed that as a Keep, with the option remaining open to re-list it if someone wanted to present new arguments for a delete. I ask as someone who does a lot of AfD commenting; if there's a rationale behind it I'd like to be able to explain it to other, newer, contributors in future. Thanks! - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

First, IMO it's a rather large stretch to call a 2-1 split "consensus". Of course we have twisted that word's meaning quite a bit already, but that stretch is large enough to make me uncomfortable. Second, it is true that one of the keeps is strong, but AfD depends on at least several people either looking for or looking at sources (a source one considers "reliable" might be totally "unreliable" in the opinion of another), and one person saying we have sources 1, 2, 3...etc., and another saying "there seem to be a lot of reliable sources" is IMO somewhat insufficient especially when we are talking about a BLP. Moreover, there is no deadline, the AfD had not been relisted previously, and nothing is lost by an extra week of discussion. Add that to the low participation, and I considered a relist more appropriate. Tim Song (talk) 07:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Tim! While it's still not the call I would have made I appreciate you taking the time to respond and I understand your reasons above. I guess it's just frustrating to see a lot iof AfDs going for two or three weeks due to re-lists but I agree that a re-list is never going to cause the world to end. Thanks again for your tireless administrative work at AfD - it's the work of reasonable, dedicated people like yourself that helps the whole process keep ticking. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Question.

I think This user and this one are the same person, because the latter seems to be a SPA, starting to edit just after Zuhdi stopped, on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shahida Azad Jamaludin. Could you please help me? I don't know what I'm supposed to do. (p.s. congrats on the mop, I always thought you were already one) SS✞^(Kay) 08:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

If Zuhdi starts back again then it might be worth an SPI especially if they are editing disruptively, but otherwise it's rather pointless. Tim Song (talk) 08:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

Would you be able to handle the requests of both me and another user here? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

You did actually look at what's happening on the pan-Arabism page, didn't you? N-HH talk/edits 01:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocks are rarely effective when one is dealing with a multi-way edit war, and I'm hardly competent to determine if a particular piece of content is "rubbish". Tim Song (talk) 01:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Grzegorz Michalski

Hi Tim and thanks for your reply. I believe that G4 in general applies to the reasons why a page was deleted rather than literal content. The page was speedy deleted after an AfD discussion in which everybody expressed an opinion that the person does not fulfill notability criteria for academics by far. This has not change, the described person is still an assistant professor, clearly failing the "professor test", tenure criterion, lacking international books, etc. Now, if you decline SD, the procedure of discussing this article in an AfD can perpetuate ad infinitum, since one can always rephrase an article (while one cannot do the same to notability). Therefore, I'd like to suggest you to reconsider. If you don't, the bottom line in my view would be directing the article to AfD discussion, rather than removing the SD template and leaving the article as if there were no concerns about it.

PS Please, note, that on Polish Wikipedia I am advocating keeping the same person's bio (in a current AfD discussion there), because our notability criteria are different. Pundit|utter 07:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If you look at the AfD, it was deleted as a copyvio, not for lack of notability, The debate was only open for several hours. I can't possibly apply a G4 here. If it were substantially identical to the deleted version, then it would be a copyvio as well, but it was not either. You can, of course, renominate it if you want. Tim Song (talk) 07:59, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I missed the copyvio reported in the discussion. In this case an AfD discussion is definitely the proper way to do it. cheers Pundit|utter 08:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI, comments welcome. Pundit|utter 09:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Brandon simmons

Tim,

Yesterday you deleted a short article i had written that I had defined in the talk page as fiction, and made the point that it was for school, and that it was temporary. I need to recreate the article so that the link works when I get graded. I dont care if it gets deleted a week from today, at which point it will have been graded but as for now, deleting it is going to cause me problems in school. I can't imagine you would continue to delete my temporary article when I am simply using it to prove a point, especially understanding that I am only trying to better myself and my classmates. The article was called Brandon simmons. It has been deleted twice, once by you and once by someone else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.23.68.40 (talk) 13:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

There's no way I'm going to restore it. This is an encyclopedia, not a webhost for your school. Tim Song (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Hallo Tim! I corrected it, I just forgot it, sorry

Uwe Kils 15:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment: Tim Song, it appears that the response by Kils (talk · contribs) to your "Amended Restriction", was to blank it out from his talk page, see [2]. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, he is allowed to do that - more proof that he's read it. Let me know if he violates the restrictions again. Tim Song (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Nod, agreed, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

History merge

Tim,

Thanks for the history merge at ANI. Is it really as easy as this?:

a. Check that there is no time-overlap between the two articles to be histmerged. If so, leave to someone besides me. b. Temporarily delete the target c. Move the other one to the same name. d. Undelete the deleted versions.

Perhaps I've been scared of it for no reason. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Basically yes, and you can simply move the page and MediaWiki will ask you if you want to delete the target, so you can do b and c together. Also, after undeleting, you need to purge the cache and revert to the correct revision, as the move generates a new revision that is on top, which normally is not something you want. Tim Song (talk) 17:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll give it a try sometime (on an article with a small # of revisions, in case I screw it up and have to fix things manually). --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I like to add my thanks to editors I notice doing good work, many thanks for your valued edits to the 3RR board, well done there. Off2riorob (talk) 00:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Tratra22395768's edits

Hi. I note you've blocked Tratra22395768. Should something be done about all sea snail articles he/she's created? As I understand it, species are usually inherently notable, but surely they can't all be left there like that? I'm still a little new to this, is this something that should be brought up at ANI? Thanks! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 05:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Ironholds is dealing with that user's articles right now. Worst case scenario, an admin can delete all of the articles created by that user. Tim Song (talk) 05:44, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay. I'd just put it on WP:ANI just before you responded. Sorry! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 05:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Nicely done

While the final result did not squarely match my suggestions, I wanted to commend you on your close of the difficult Tapuah junction stabbing review. I thought your reasoning was sound, the fact that you took the time to explain it (and do so articulately) was great, and your avoiding the needless wikidrama of a relist where so many had already opined was especially commendable. Nice job.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

missed a spot

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Helgaisback added Julypeary (talk · contribs) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 07:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Bagged and tagged. Tim Song (talk) 07:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Yusuf_Ali

Hi Tim,

Hope you will be well.

I want to know the reason of deleting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Yusuf_Ali - please inform why.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.110.82.52 (talk) 14:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The article is a biography entirely negative in tone sourced to a blog. Tim Song (talk) 14:21, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Gilberto Garcia

Author has requested deletion (see here) other contributions only add up to tagging as unsourced and adding missing categories. The page should be deleted as the only substantial contributor has requested deletion. King of the North East 18:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

What about this? Tim Song (talk) 18:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for deleting my page! :) I really appreciate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachel David8 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Just to make you aware Tim, there was a WP:ANI thread discussing that article, just for your information in case something more comes of it. Cheers, SGGH ^ping! 22:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Kissle

Can I obtain permission to use this great tool?? MaenK.A._Talk 18:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. Tim Song (talk) 13:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:British and Irish Historic House books recently published

Is this an appropriate use of WP: space? Doesn't seem like it to me. I'd say userfy. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:04, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anyone suggesting userfication in that AfD so I don't think I could have closed it that way. The AfD was listed and closed under peculiar circumstances, so I've no objections if you want to MfD it immediately. Tim Song (talk) 00:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Steinway D-274's ADF

Hi there. Just wanted to know why is it that when 10 editors gave their opinion and 5 supported the merging of the article and 5 keep the article, you closed the ADF as "keep" instead of letting the discussions continue. Sorry, I am not familiar with the "ADF's rules" and would be grateful if you could explain it to me. Cheers.--Karljoos (talk) 02:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

AfDs are closed after 7 days, only exception is that they can be relisted if there is insufficient participation - and 10 !votes is anything but insufficient. See WP:RELIST. As there is no consensus to merge, the article is kept by default. Tim Song (talk) 02:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation.--Karljoos (talk) 02:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Tridgell

I see people are trying to get the article about andrew tridgell deleted. He is a signficant person in the free software community. Is it possible for you to stop it being deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.193.130 (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Some mistake: there never was such an AfD. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Tasbian

Tim Song, thank you for your action with regard to Tasbian (talk · contribs). Could you please log the block at the bottom of the page at WP:ARBSCI, as all articles within that scope are under article probation? Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Done Tim Song (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 20:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair.

Why did you delete this page. I don't understand your reason. I don't think it's fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naukriforwomen (talk • contribs) 20:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hello

I would like to ask your opinion about the format that should be used for the localities from Romania where at least 20% of the population speaks Hungarian. Note: "In Romania, the official language is Romanian."[3] Also "Where over 20 of the population is of an ethnic minority, all documents of a legal character will be published in the ethnic minorities' mother tongue.".

Variant 1. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 2. Romanian_Name ([Hungarian_Name] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help))
Variant 3. Romanian_Name or Hungarian_Name (Romanian: Romanian_Name; Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 4. Romanian_Name(Romanian) or Hungarian_Name(Hungarian)

There are used different formats on different articles and I think it should exist a standard format used for all of them

Thanks in advance for your answer and sorry if you found this message on your personal page as beingf inaproppriate (Umumu (talk) 07:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC))

I've never edited in this subject area, and so I do not consider myself sufficiently informed to offer an opinion. Tim Song (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Oops

RE. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions... My mistake. --Dc987 (talk) 09:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

BTW, the warning on top of the page was only saying "Only arbitrators may propose motions in this section.", do you think it's a good idea to add Only arbitrators may vote (in the warning and the 'Advice for editing Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration')? Helpful for editors unfamiliar with the ArbCom space. --Dc987 (talk) 02:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I would have thought that it was self-evident; you might want to talk to a clerk about this. Tim Song (talk) 16:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Loremaster

In consideration of the users' commitment here: [4], are you alright lifting (or allowing another administrator to lift) the block early? –xeno^talk 15:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I would frankly like to see some evidence that they can refrain from socking/block evading before unblocking, but since I've been mopified for just about two weeks, I'll defer to your judgment on that. Tim Song (talk) 15:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

It's hard to disprove a negative =) –xeno^talk 16:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead an unblocked on the conditions they not edit war or abuse multiple accounts. If such behaviour repeats, an indefinite block would be in order. –xeno^talk 16:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleaner777

Hi Tim Song. I just reverted this edit by an SPA. Might it be another sock? Favonian (talk) 18:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, a CU-confirmed sock. Tim Song (talk) 22:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

RFCU/SSP question

Hi Tim. Thanks for your response to my request. I thought that perhaps checkuser also performed some other heuristics (http user-agent comparisons, etc.). Given that there's not much more to be gained from RFCU, what should I do next? //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:09, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

They do, but when the IPs geolocate to rather diverse places - one is from FL, three or four from NY, a couple from GA, one from KS and two from NH, etc., the useragent information is unlikely to be able to prove sockpuppetry. Now you wait for someone to look at the behavior and decide if they are related. Tim Song (talk) 18:13, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm still confused as to how geolocate and user-agent are related... user-agent is a string sent to webservers by one's browser. While they are by no means unique, however there are probably enough subtle differences (depending on patch levels, installed plugins, etc) between users that if all these IP's shared the exact same user-agent string, it would be a strong case for one user with geographically distinct proxies. Either way, I'll just hang back until someone else takes a look. Thanks again for taking the time for the help! //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:43, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Or it could be two computers with the same configuration. The more geographically diverse the IPs are, the more likely the alternative explanation is, and the less useful CU is. Tim Song (talk) 18:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Really trying not to be obtuse here, and this is only in the spirit of knowledge transfer (NOT arguing you to reconsider the decline), but I've got to point out that (1) geographical diversity proves nothing if they're proxies; and (2) we're talking about nearly a dozen IP's. The chances of 8-10 of them having the exact same user agent are quite unlikely; one or two maybe, but if RFCU can confirm that there are 9-11 IP's with a unique user-agent that are all only contributing to a single Wikipedia article, and those contributions are all mutually supporting then I think that's a pretty strong case for a sock confirmation. Be that as it may, I'm not pressing you to change your mind, but rather trying to understand your point as to why. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, in that particular scenario a CU might tend to show that these are the same user, if they are using a rare user agent, but it's a very rare and hence very unlikely scenario. Geographical diversity implies a lot of computers and so a large chance of finding a few computers with the same user agent. Yes, if they are using proxies then diversity means nothing, but the only way we can tell if they are using proxies is by looking at the behavior, and if the behavior matches then it does not matter if they have the same user agent or not. In short, the case boils down to behavioral analysis, and CU won't tell you much here. Tim Song (talk) 21:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Right on. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me. :) //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:02, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Kissle error

I received this error. I don't know much computerspeak so maybe you can tell me what happened. Thanks. --Mike moral ♪♫ 04:45, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

You need to install the newest version of the .NET framework (v 3.5). Tim Song (talk) 04:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

That would make sense. I'm still on 3.2 or so. --Mike moral ♪♫ 04:51, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Ognjen Vuletić

Hello! Me (under my account Monny B) requested page to be deleted and you wrote that I'm not author of the page which is not true. But I would really like to delete it. Can you help me? Also, what that means "other users have added substantial content"? I don't have much experience on wiki. Thanks! --Monny B (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I see. Are you Ogggy (talk · contribs), too? Tim Song (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I am :) Could you please do it for me? Delete that page? Ty --Monny B (talk) 17:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)]

Can you confirm that by making an edit using that account? Tim Song (talk) 17:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I've made it. --Monny B (talk) 21:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Happy Tim Song's Day!

User:Tim Song has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Tim Song's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Tim Song!

Peace,
Rlevse
00:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Well overdue. Grats. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Nice close

÷seresin 04:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I came here to say this too. ReverendWayne (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't think I could have said it better myself. –xeno^talk 19:58, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey there, I noticed we were stepping over each other a bit at WP:AIV, thanks very much for your contributions here. :) I see that an IP commented [5] in the section of this thread at WP:AE where it says in that subsection This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the section above. -- Should that IP comment be moved? Hope you are doing well, -- Cirt (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

That's probably DGG :) Tim Song (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, okay thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 17:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Clarification required for G7

I've asked for clarification of CSD G7 following your rejecting my request as I was the only provider of "substantial" content and there was no talk page. -- samj _in^out 21:42, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Same applies for this request and this rejection. -- samj _in^out 21:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Responded there. Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

User:JSimmonz

Thank you for blocking. FYI, the user continues to make lame personal attacks. I advised him to stop it or he would have his talk page editing privilege taken away. That would be up to an admin's judgment, of course. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

If they are not planning to ask for an unblock they have no need for talk page access. Revoked. Tim Song (talk) 05:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Should I clear his talk page, or leave it as-is? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I see you took care of it. That's best. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

What's going on?

On this page [6]. I've just noticed this from yesterday, by this obvious sockpuppet, possibly trying to impersonate me. He's been blocked at least, but what of the BarzanPDK18 page now? following that weird edit and the edits you just made, the page seems mixed up. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 16:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I've restored the version before this fool arrived. Thanks for blocking him before he did further mischief. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 16:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I histmerged the case the sock filed so we don't have an obviously spurious SPI archive under your name. Please leave it alone. Tim Song (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

So that I understand this incident correctly Tim; after this edit by this user, a case was opened here, and in the ensuing discussion it was established that User:ܒܓܕܕ was a possible sockpuppet of User:BarzanKurdistan16, and consequently he was blocked and tagged as a BarzanPDK18 sockpuppet. Afterwards you merged the history and contents of this page into here and deleted this page. Would that be a correct understanding of what happened? So this was Barzan hitting back at me for targeting his sockpuppets. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 10:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Basically, yes. Tim Song (talk) 14:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Stale?

You decided this 3RR [7] was "stale". It was a clear violation. And that editor is back in the same article, making WP:POINTy edits, including edits about the same material. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

At the time I closed that report, the edit warring seems to have subsided. Blocked 2 weeks. Tim Song (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

deletion of File:America_Movil1

cloud you please revert this edit, i nominated this file for CSD because it was removed, and i checked the page and it appeared a name change or merger had taken place when it was actually extensive vandalism, what gave it away was a German subsidiary called "Carl Martin", an English Football player. The vandalism has bean reverted, and the user responsible has Ben warned about Wikipedia's policies against vandalism. Thanks Koman90 (talk), Network+ (Verify) 13:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Done Tim Song (talk) 14:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Protected Jim DeMint

Hi Tim. This war lit up again after you closed the 3RR as stale, so I went ahead and protected the article for a week, leaving a comment at Talk:Jim_DeMint#Protected. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice on AN/I...

and thanks for blocking the editor and the underlying IP -- but the guy's now using another IP, User:208.88.120.88, and has continued to attack me on the AN/I thread, getting perhaps a little too personal for comfort. It looks like you're not editing at the moment, but when you come back on, could you check to see if anyone's blocked this IP? So far no one seems to be responding to my requests. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocked by MuZemike (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Tim Song (talk) 12:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but they switched to User:208.88.120.87 and undid hundreds of my edits before being blocked. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I blocked the range this morning. Tim Song (talk) 15:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you once again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)