Content created and contributions
Awards and accolades I've received
This user co-nominated File:A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms - Pieter Aertsen - Google Cultural Institute.jpg become a featured picture on 21 December 2015.
This user helped "Acquacotta" become a good article on 10 May 2016.
This user helped "Applesauce cake" become a good article on 8 March 2016.
This user helped "Avocado cake" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "Beurre Maître d'Hôtel" become a good article on 18 March 2016.
This user helped "Carrot soup" become a good article on 2 February 2016.
This user helped "Chips and dip" become a good article on 2 March 2016.
This user helped "Clam dip" become a good article on 26 April 2016.
This user helped "Clementine cake" become a good article on 3 March 2016.
This user helped "Crab dip" become a good article on 16 February 2016.
This user helped "Deep frying" become a good article on 27 September 2015.
This user helped "Deep-fried butter" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "French fry vending machine" become a good article on 5 April 2016.
This user helped "Jif (lemon juice)" become a good article on 5 June 2016.
This user helped "Lemon Drop" become a good article on 2 February 2016.
This user helped "Mushroom ketchup" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "Naem" become a good article on 2 March 2016.
This user helped "Old-fashioned doughnut" become a good article on 7 March 2016.
This user helped "Pancake machine" become a good article on 9 March 2016.
This user helped "Pink slime" become a good article on 25 March 2016.
This user helped "Pizza cheese" become a good article on 21 February 2016.
This user helped "Plum cake" become a good article on 10 February 2016.
This user helped "Railroad Gazette" become a good article on 21 April 2016.
This user helped "Steak" become a good article on 25 November 2015.
This user helped "Testaroli" become a good article on 8 April 2016.
This user helped "Vegetable chips" become a good article on 10 April 2016.
My Wikimedia project contribution areas
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Northamerica1000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Unitedstates1000)
Jump to: navigation, search
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg This user prefers to communicate
on-wiki, rather than by email.

Draft:Komal Jha[edit]

I believe I have taken your word of caution in adding this post by appending it at the end with - Edit Source !

Thank you for all the contributions ! This discussion thread is closed stating 'Keep' as a decision.
(cur | prev) 22:07, 24 June 2016‎ JohnCD (talk | contribs)‎ . . (23,301 bytes) (+2,047)‎ . . (→‎Draft:Komal Jha: Closing debate; result was keep (using User:Doug/closemfd.js)) (undo | thank)
Now, as User:SmokeyJoe mentioned in the same thread, is it appropriate to move it to main article space? Please guide.
Also, about a new article on a different subject, which I want to contribute, should I have to go through the review mechanism or can I publish directly?
Thanks ! (talk) 12:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Hello Yes, the MfD discussion was closed with a keep result, but I have to leave this matter to DGG, the administrator who performed the most recent deletion of the article and also most recently fully protected the page from recreation (see the log page for the article). There are two reasons I cannot unilaterally publish the article: 1) this could potentially be perceived as wheel warring, per the history of the page, and 2) I am involved because I have made contributions to the draft. So, after posting this, I will notify DGG about this discussion and we'll await their response here. North America1000 03:11, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I'll look tomorrow. DGG ( talk ) 05:15, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both for all the support and guidance. I shall look forward to it. Also, please let me know as I asked earlier, should I go through AfC reviews for my new articles too or can I directly create and publish them? Thanks ! (talk) 07:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Hope DGG will pull out some time from his busy schedule to look in to Draft:Komal Jha and publish/guide as discussed earlier. In the meantime, can I create the other article directly and publish, without AfC review? This is a new article and the subject is on this : Ravi Mooruru. Thannks ! (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC) I notified DGG on their talk page about your comment here inre Draft:Komal Jha. Regarding Ravi Mooruru, yes, you can publish an article directly. Just be sure that the subject passes notability guidelines such as WP:BASIC and WP:GNG, that the article has a credible claim of significance regarding the subject, to prevent it from being tagged for WP:A7 speedy deletion, and use reliable sources that demonstrate the subject's notability and properly verify content. For more general information about publishing articles, check out WP:42. North America1000 07:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the continued support. I will make note of the points that you have mentioned above, also I would cull out the references from either renown news papers or renown TV channels only. By now, I believe I have experience the significance of the sources and consequences. Should I need anything, shall disturb you. Thanks ! (talk) 09:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Pinging DGG: Hi DGG, could you please take a look at the draft and consider matters. On 5 July 2016 you stated that you'd "... look tomorrow", but it's been ten days, and has requested several times whether or not this can be moved to main namespace. This is just a reminder, not meant to be a "hassle" or anything like that. North America1000 13:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • I re-read the material. I do not think it will hold up at AfD without substanatial modification, and perhaps not even with it, because the roles are mostly minor, as they were at the previous AfDs. . The sort of Indian articles used for documentation are straightforward press releases, and I am informed they are normally paid for. I am therefore not going to move what I still consider a grossly promotional article to mainspace, any more than I would write one. I will however not object if you or any other admin should do it. I should perhaps have explained earlier that I have said for many years that any admin who disagrees with me can reverse any action of mine without asking permission, I only ask to be told about it. In fact, I think our present rule discouraging this may promote harmony, but it also promotes Ownership. DGG ( talk ) 23:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Hi DGG, Thank you for the opinion and to a certain extent I agree that some of the trivial so called news portals are paid, but not necessarily it holds good for mainstream media. However, I have clarified many times during discussions that I have picked up the news sources from mainstream media of India namely, Times of India, Deccan Chronicles, DNA to example a few. These newspapers have few-ten millions of daily subscriptions. Also, as I have researched, their respective regional circulations (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Mumbai editions - which sums up to more than 75 million daily subscriptions) have also noted this artiste. Also, there are some news channels on Television namely - Sahara Samay-Mumbai, TV9 Telugu and Kannada have broadcasted interviews of this artiste notable number of times. There is least possibility that these news sources are paid. Hence, I request you to allow to move to article space and believe me, there are more to update in the article which I know of eventually. With all your guidance I am open to do in coming days and I look forward that you will encourage me to contribute to other articles to bring some emerging artistes and regional popularity to the light and let the world have a knowledge on what is new at this part of the world. If at all any nominations happen in future for AfD, I shall be able to debate with sufficient evidences. Hope I am making (talk) 06:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC) Thanks !


  • I have performed several copy edits to remove promotional tone from the draft, perform punctuation and grammar corrections, content organization, etc. I recommend for you to continue to copy edit the draft so that it reads entirely neutrally, just stating facts and the subject's noteworthiness in an objective manner. Pinging DGG to notify him about this new message here. North America1000 15:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Hello ! Thanks for the edits. I remember during the MfD discussions, it was stated by someone that it doesn't any longer look promotional and hence I thought it is good to go. Well, there is no problem in taking a look again in correlation with tone. Thanks ! (talk) 16:25, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
to repeat: any admin who cares to may move it to article space, but I personally am not going to. I think it has than than an even chance of surviving AfD, and that's the minimum standard. If NorthAmerica thinks it has a better chance, he is welcome to move it. I'm not personally planning to list it for AfD if he does, but if someone else does, I may join the discussion. DGG ( talk ) 01:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • and DGG: I have published the article to main namespace, at Komal Jha. North America1000 18:35, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks a tonne for getting my first article published ! This is really very encouraging for me to contribute more and more towards the community. Thanks for all the efforts, support and guidance provided all this while ! I appreciate it ! Thanks again !! Looking forward to long lasting association. Thanks ! (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Ousterhout AfD[edit]

Were you surprised as well that that got called as no consensus? I notice you stayed out of the debate but still tagged a couple of the !votes. It obviously makes no real difference since keep is the default outcome when there's no consensus, but still, I thought this was a poor call. Secondary sources citing primary sources is not a reason to delete and the promotional complaints were before the article got revised. When the WP:RS to satisfy WP:GNG exist, you're supposed to keep, no matter what the vote count. When I looked, I realized the admin who closed it doesn't have that much experience. Msnicki (talk) 17:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

@Msnicki: inre the AfD discussion, you can always discuss the closure with the closing admin to present them with your take on the matter. North America1000 02:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I, on the other hand, thing the close was probably in error: it should have been delete, because the references were unreliable and anecdotal-- Allure to show notability of a surgeon? But rather than appealing -- ot renominating as can be done almost immediately after a no-consensus close, I'm just fixing the article as best I can. Menicki. eight years of experience at Deletion Review (which somewhat to my amazement actually adds up to over a thousand reviews I've watched or commented in) has me firmly convinced that regardless of what one thinks should have happened, it is almost never worthwhile to appeal a no-consensus close. DGG ( talk ) 08:10, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I can't see any point to DRV'ing a no consensus close, either. It's also not usually worth discussing with the closing admin unless you're intending to DRV them. No one ever changes their close just because you ask; they usually just double down. Also, "fixing the article" does not mean deleting it sentence-by-sentence because you weren't able to delete it all at once. Msnicki (talk) 08:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Msnicki, I've changed closes. Admins vary. The point of discussing it is that you will perhaps be satisfied by the explanation--abouth alf the time, people are. Of course, not all admins do give detailed explanations on request as they ought to.
Since you reverted my changes on Ousterhout, I assume the your last sentence refers to that; we can discuss why on the talk p. sentence by sentence . My reaction is not trying to remove it sentence by sentence, though I know some people have done that at times; I meant what I said-- that since we're keeping it, I'm trying to improve it by removing the weak points, as for any article. DGG ( talk ) 17:43, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I'll think about approaching her. If you're sincere about improving an article, one of the best ways is to look for sources. In fact, it's something you're supposed to do in good faith at every AfD, since the sources merely need to exist, not actually be cited to establish notability. I try to do that even when I hate the subject and I think you'll notice I change my !votes pretty routinely when others discover sources, again, even if I personally hate the article. I think you could have done better this time.
The sources establish that he invented facial feminization surgery (FFS) but I'm not convinced you appreciate the significance of that, so that may be a reason you're skeptical of the whole article as promotional. The significance is that he was literally the first surgeon to figure out how to change a male face into a female face, all of it without visible scars. (All of the jaw work was done via incisions inside the mouth.) Before that, there was simply no one who knew how to do this and trans people got nose jobs and cheek implants that did not fool anyone. To make an analogy, to the trans community, this is like the first guy to figure out how to do a heart transplant or make a working light bulb. It meant you actually could change the gender people saw you as, without any makeup. What wasn't possible became possible.
Naturally, we don't cite any of this in a BLP, but here is one of the earliest personal accounts,[1] from 18 years ago, several years before the term FFS had been invented, that might help you understand how revolutionary and how significant this was at the time. Nicole (today an EE lecturer [2]) suggested the lip shortening, which Ousterhout then began doing on all his later patients. Msnicki (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Iam very much aware of the importance. The technique should be discussed in detail, at the page on it. What you are saying is not that he invented it, but that he greatly improved it. There's a difference. If people had been doing it before, but less successfully, he didn't invent the idea. Perhaps the best way to deal with this is to expand the article, using good sources, primarily medical reviews that meet WP:RSMed. DGG ( talk ) 04:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
That is absolutely positively NOT what I said! I thought I was so clear about that that I am absolutely stunned by your claim. I said he invented facial feminization because that is what he did. Before Ousterhout, there was no such thing as facial feminization. It was not merely that we did not have a name for it or that it wasn't very good and that he improved it. It simply did not exist.
When all you have is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail. Most plastic surgeons trans people might have approached before Ousterhout would have been cosmetic surgeons who did only soft tissue work, as described at Plastic surgery#Cosmetic surgery. They no idea how to feminize a face. If they had, they'd have realized they weren't prepared to do the serious bony work required to change a male skull into female skull. So they did what they knew how to do, nose jobs and cheek implants, which didn't fool anyone. What Ousterhout did was realize that the bony structure of the face had to change, especially the jaw, the brow bossing and the forehead, which other surgeons simply never touched. He figured out how they would have to change and he figured out how to do it. The jaw was especially problematic because most plastic surgeons are not dentists or oral surgeons and they don't know how to work on the jaw without risking serious nerve damage. Ousterhout could do this because he is also a dentist.
This is his invention based on his research. So far as I know, the lip shortening is the only procedure in the mix that was not entirely Ousterhout's idea. And even that, while suggested by a patient, was his idea how to do it. (Other plastic surgeons had sometimes tried to lift or give greater fullness to the upper lip with an incision at the lip line, rolling the lip up, leaving an often extremely visible scar and an odd-looking lip.) Every surgeon who now does FFS (and there are only 12) has copied what Ousterhout invented as a basic set of procedures. This is why some reasonable discussion of what he has invented belongs in the article about him. It would be like having an article on Thomas Edison that doesn't discuss how he invented the light bulb. Msnicki (talk) 04:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
when I wrote that's what you said, I meant that's what the fact you provided would indicate to me, but then I am a little skeptical in all fields about claims to having invented something . You give two examples of his innovations, first to perform a particular lip procedure, which may be important but hardly fundamental, and claim to extensively modify the bony structure, which would seem much more important. If you are right, and the difference from each of them is so dramatic as to be recognized by plastic surgeons in general, it needs explicit MEDRS compliant sources for it. The first step will be some quotes from the two you do have that will demonstrate what you say. If you could possibly find one that's open access , that would be even better.
I just note that for the examples you cite, based on our WP article, there are three people who could be considered responsible for the development and realization of heart transplants, & at least 4 for the incandescent light bulb (In the US, Edison had by far the best publicity, but in the UK, Swan was generally recognized). And please don't assume I come here from a posture of ignorance. It's true I didn't realize Osterhaut had a major role, but I did know about the surgery, I've worked here a little on related articles, & I've read a few of the memoirs. (&, incidentally, I wonder who's considered the leader/developedr in various European coutnries--this is often different) DGG ( talk ) 10:24, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Again, I'm not sure you do understand. I am not asserting he invented the individual procedures. I am saying he invented the combination of techniques and how he applied them, creating something that did not exist before. He studied 1500 skulls to figure out what was different between male and female skulls and then he figured out how to change the parts that were different, using the skills and knowledge he had developed working on severely deformed patients. To shorten the chin, for example, he used a sliding genioplasty. No one claims he invented that procedure. But before Ousterhout, no one had thought of using a sliding genioplasty for facial feminization. Similarly, surgeons had long been using burrs and methylmethacrylate to reshape bones. But before Ousterhout, no one had thought of grinding down the bony brow bossing and then rounding out the forehead with methymethacrylate[3] to change a male forehead into a female forehead.
Andrea James[4] and Nicole[5] were the first transwomen to post before and after pictures[6] in September 1998 [7] and January 1999[8], respectively. As is often the case, knowing it can be done is often key to doing it and pretty quickly, Frans Noorman van der Dussen[9] and Suporn Watanyusakul[10] also began doing FFS, using pretty much the same combination of procedures Ousterhout had developed. But Ousterhout was the first. Msnicki (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

About List of Rullers of the Philippines[edit]

  • I just Need help to review the Deletion tag by User:Riohondo on the List of Rullers of the Philippines since it was tagged on deletion list since 6th of July , but since you reviewed the article how can i add supplemental references to avoid deletion of an article?


Hi, expect youve noticed that today and yesterday SwisterTister is swamping AFDs. He seems to be taking them straight off the new page feed and afding them within a few seconds and claiming to have done extensive searches, some are bad articles but others are not.You can see his contribs how fast he's nominating. Thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 06:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

@Atlantic306: Before I provide any response, I'm pinging SwisterTwister here to address your concerns if they would like to. Seems only fair. North America1000 06:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Frankly I'm only commenting here because I'm being asked to since I attempt my best to stay away; FWIW, I am nominating articles that are exactly deletion material and are not convincing of any applicable notability at all. May I note that I should not be scrutinzed simply for being a deletionist.... WP:AGF would apply here also.... SwisterTwister talk 07:26, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
User:SwisterTwister The problem is your claiming to have done extensive searches which is impossible in the time from one page to the next straight off the new page feed and that gives the impression to other !voters that an extensive search has been done and they do not need to do one themselves which can result in very unfair deletions . I noticed this when pages i'd marked as reviewed were quickly Afd.Atlantic306 (talk) 07:39, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
@Atlantic306: You may want to ping the user here; it's unlikely they have this page watchlisted, so they may not see your reply. North America1000 07:45, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Need help-Advice[edit]

need help for an advice idunno how to explain this properly too much trouble... But its kinda... My images which in the Philippines article had been reverted all time by this User:Riohondo now with the help of the User:Obsidian Soul to delete my contributions here and they using the WP:OR wiki or is not violated since it was a free source, (also they stated that my work is Propaganda) although its not since propaganda has not a source , and my image was made up, But it had a source based on the refecences/citations on the articles itself..

Plus their accusations of propaganda was in the history of my old account User:Philipandrew, in that time arround 2014, i dont know yet multi accounts are prohibited in wiki, So i been ground but i think its not the reason to use it in this new account i made i making alot of Contributions here so far, But some deletionist tried to Use it as a weapon against me.

since the references i made idon't know how to fight them in legal way) since im not really famillar to other policies Except on the copyrights, But if you give me hand for just advice it will be a big help. Thanks if you can give me a link for where should i send my complain thanks ({ ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔| ໑ } P.A.-II (talk))

My impression is that I don't want to become involved in all of this. I am working on other stuff. I recommend discussing matters on the article talk page with users who disagree with your edits. North America1000 14:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ham and eggs[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 11 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ham and eggs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1899, after hiking for four days with almost no food, entrepreneur Duncan Hines ordered $5 worth of ham and eggs (pictured) at a restaurant in Cheyenne, Wyoming? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ham and eggs. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ham and eggs), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Vista Outdoor[edit]

Would you be willing to take a look at the tag on Vista Outdoor? A user that does lot of work at COIN and an IP editor both gave it a good scrubbing and it seems the COI editor who got blocked is no longer active. (talk) 14:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

  • I haven't contributed to the article, so it would take me some time to go through all of the revisions to examine what has changed in it. I only have so much time, so I don't forsee myself becoming involved at this time. If you want the {{Coi}} template removed from the article, you can denote changes to the article that qualify the tag's removal on the article's talk page and then remove it. If anyone disagrees with removal of the template, the matter can also be discussed on the article talk page. North America1000 21:09, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

AfD NASAMS 2[edit]

Hi, you did a speedy keep of the NASAMS 2 article, but still no sources WP:V verify how that subject has independent notability to satisfy WP:GNG, the keep criteria for any standalone article. Which sources in that article do you think verify notability since you closed the AfD? Kind regards, AadaamS (talk) 19:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@AadaamS: Your nomination was essentially for a merge, ("It is better as a section in its parent article, not as a standalone. Merge and redirect.") so the discussion qualified for a speedy keep close as per WP:SK#1. The standard way to handle merges is to add merge templates to the page and merge target page, initiate a discussion on the merge target talk page, and take it from there. If you just want the article deleted, I recommend starting a deletion discussion without suggesting a merge. Also, I don't know if you performed source searches prior to nominating for deletion, but it's worthy to note that topic notability is not based upon the state of sourcing in articles, or lack thereof. The wording of the nomination suggests that the nomination may have been based only upon the state of sources in the article. North America1000 21:04, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Indeed sources were searched for before nominating this AfD. I don't know if you searched for sources before closing the AfD, but if you did, I would be interested in knowing which sources you consider WP:V verify the WP:GNG notability of this subject. There also appears to be no possibility to reword an AfD without closing it? AadaamS (talk) 05:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
@AadaamS: I didn't source search for this topic, because it was essentially a sort of procedural close per the nomination being a merge discussion in nature. As worded at the time of closure, it qualified for the speedy keep close. If you'd like to reword the nomination, apparently for deletion instead of merging, feel free to create a new nomination. North America1000 06:43, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I'll look into a new AfD. You seem to know the AfD rules better than I so I would ask what you think about the speedy keep by user SSTFlyer of this nomination? See here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serena van der Woodsen (2nd nomination). In my opinion, not one of the responders claimed even the existence of sources to prove notability (that is sources going beyond WP:TRIVIALMENTION). What do you think? I've read in some guideline that consensus cannot override the GNG, though it would appear in this case that it has. Kind regards, AadaamS (talk) 19:52, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000: a ping for good measure. I understand your're a busy editor so I can take "no" for an answer too. Kind regards, AadaamS (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
AadaamS I'm going to pass on critiquing the Serena van der Woodsen AfD discussion, other than to denote that the discussion was closed with a "keep" result, rather than with a "speedy keep" result as you have stated above. However, you can discuss the matter with the closer, SSTflyer, if you'd like. Another option is deletion review, but keep in mind that per WP:DELREVD, it is recommended to first discuss matters with the discussion closer. North America1000 03:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Indeed I did contact the non-admin closer, my comment disappeared unanswered along with many other comments when that talk page was archived. That's strange because I can't delete comments on my own talk page. Anyway, you are indeed correct to point out that it wasn't a speedy keep, it was a non-admin close of the AfD. I have contacted the non-admin closer again and await further developments. On principle, does consensus override the GNG? AadaamS (talk) 06:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
For a general answer, check out WP:CONLIMITED. North America1000 14:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Help Me[edit]

Can i move my draft to to main space with the same name which i used to store it?. --Markzy90 (talk) 22:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

  • @Markzy90: Please provide links to the article and draft you are asking about. North America1000 22:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
from the user contributions, it appears to be Draft:Shabi Adeniyi Oluwaseun. DGG ( talk ) 00:00, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi Markzy90: Draft articles are typically moved to main (article) namespace using the same name for the subject that exists in draft namespace, as long as the name in draft namespace is correct and accurate. DGG: From the user's contributions, Markzy90 could also be referring to Draft:Kayode Opeyemi. I'll just wait for a response from Markzy90 at this point if they have any additional questions. North America1000 03:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myanmar constitutional referendum, 2015[edit]

Hello. Could you possibly reclose this as "delete"? There was zero opposition to deletion, so I cannot understand how it can be closed as no consensus. For example, when RMs are unopposed, they are closed in favour of the move. Thanks, Number 57 11:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Number 57 The discussion was closed as no consensus as per WP:NOQUORUM, because the discussion received no comments from any editor other than your nomination. Requested moves differ considerably compared to deletion discussions, the latter of which removes content from the public view. I would be more comfortable deleting the article based upon some sort of consensus to do so. Note that I closed the discussion with WP:NPASR (no prejudice against speedy renomination), so feel free to start a new AfD discussion. North America1000 12:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Can you relist it again and I will ask for input at WP:E&R? It seems pointless starting another new AfD. Thanks, Number 57 12:08, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I note WP:NOQUORUM does not force you to close it as no consensus and allows you to delete it (i.e. "Soft deletion" or "closing in favour of the nominator's stated proposal"). Can I ask that you reconsider based on this. Number 57 12:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
@Number 57: While you were typing out the above, I reopened the discussion and relisted it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 July 15. At this point, I prefer to wait and see if anyone else contributes to the discussion. I'm quite aware of options available per WP:NOQUORUM. As I stated above, in this instance, I would be more comfortable deleting the article based upon some sort of consensus to do so. North America1000 12:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG Thanks very much i really gain a lot from your explanation. Markzy90 (talk) 05:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tamale pie[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 17 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tamale pie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that tamale pie (pictured) was invented in the United States, and has been described as a comfort food? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tamale pie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tamale pie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:16, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 29, 2016)[edit]


RMS Olympic's deck

Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Sun deck

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Rye • Answering machine

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions[edit]

Be sure to block user: 2602:306:3357:BA0:D474:9803:9E87:F3D (talk) 01:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

  • If you feel that vandalism/disruptive editing by the user has been occurring, please report this to WP:AIV, rather than here. North America1000 01:18, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Gardening wikiproject listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gardening wikiproject. Since you had some involvement with the Gardening wikiproject redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Wishva de Silva | Talk 03:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Template question[edit]

Hi, NA1000, I'd like to add a heading at the top of my user page that is similar and/or the same design as the one on Coffee's user page which I really like, provided it would be allowed, but I need to change some of the icons and links. Can you point me in the right direction for designing or utilizing an existing template that would serve my purpose? Thank you in advance....Atsme📞📧 18:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Atsme: What, you don't want to rip stuff from my user page? 718smiley.svg The easy way is to copy content from Coffee's user page to your sandbox, being sure to use proper copy attribution per WP:ATTREQ and then modify it. When you're ready, you can then publish it to your user page, again using proper copy attribution. Easy peasy. North America1000 18:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I probably have ripped stuff from your page in the past. *LOL* I tried looking at it in "edit mode" and the template is {{User:Chetblong/bar|#E0FFFF|#0000FF}} but all the links in the images are his links. I would like to be able to customize it to fit my user page if that's possible. I love the design. Atsme📞📧 19:27, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
@Atsme: The source code can be accessed directly here. As stated above, just copy the code to your sandbox (with proper copy attribution), modify as you'd like with new images, links, etc. Be sure to immediately remove the administrator and OTRS topicons if you do so, since you're not an admin etc., and again, be sure to use proper copy attribution in all steps. Hope this helps. North America1000 19:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thank you very, very much - I never would have found it. I will also ask his permission because the last thing I would want is for him to be upset over my copying it. Atsme📞📧 20:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Sirloin Stockade[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 21 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sirloin Stockade, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first Sirloin Stockade restaurant featured a giant 1,800-pound (820 kg) plastic ornamental cow? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sirloin Stockade. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sirloin Stockade), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


Last year you deleted a bio on an architect and I can only image it was a mistake.

Clearly the decision was hasty and those commenting on the matter had little or no understanding of the architectural scene in Australia. An AIA Award of any level is considered to be prestigious and the project awarded has received huge coverage not to mention the architect himself.


Vogue Living,32141


Radio National

Inside Out

Daily Telegraph



This article should be recreated and more care should be taken before such bios are deleted. I would appreciate this matter being investigated. Castlemate (talk) 07:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016[edit]