User talk:CaptRik/Archive 1

Archive 1

Check the Mary bale talk page

I left you a note on the Mary Bale discussion page. Catlover324 (talk) 14:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I have replied to your message Talk:Mary_Bale. CaptRik (talk) 14:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, CaptRik. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 14:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 14:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up re K G Suresh

I'll try to keep an eye on it.--SPhilbrickT 12:35, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks you for giving me the link, it was very helpful!

A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 15:42, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome :) CaptRik (talk) 15:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Michael J/George Toma

Hello CaptRik. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Michael J/George Toma, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: a speedy WP:CSD#U1 request can only be accepted from the account that owns the page. This is doing no harm, but if you think it should be deleted you could nominate it at WP:MFD. JohnCD (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation - I misunderstood that part of the criteria. The reason for the deletion request originated from here. Wikipedia:Help_desk#Deleting_preliminary_article_from_userspace - I've notified the user who raised the request and asked them to apply the template if they still want to proceed with the deletion. CaptRik (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Your tag would probably have been accepted if you had linked to the help desk thread in your edit summary. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Your help desk

I'm not sure if tis was your question but see Template:Infobox_military_structure for the infobox parameters--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

See this edit to see how it was fixed. "Northern Ireland2" was not a valid parameter. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:35, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation! I didn't appreciate that Template:Infobox_military_structure is actually redirected to military installation. How would you find out what a valid parameter for map_type is? CaptRik (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe this Template:Location_map/List is a list of the acceptable parameters.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Now I confess I'm puzzled. I thought the problem was that Northern Ireland2 wasn't a valid map type. While I see it is up for deletion, it is a redirect, and seems to be valid, so I'm not sure why there was a problem.

Template:Location map Northern Ireland2

I originally thought this was a simple issue, but I now see it is beyond my skill set. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to help explain, thanks. I'll shrug my shoulders and move on... the article is now fixed. CaptRik (talk) 14:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, CaptRik. You have new messages at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates.
Message added 11:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

ricky Oneil article

Ricky is a real person who starred in the TV program treasure island and this webpage proves he exist: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0642290/?ref_=fn_al_nm_2 Must his Wikipedia be deleted? Venustar84 (talk) 00:03, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Venustar84, just in case you see this, i've replied on your own talk page. CaptRik (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Mount Damavand

Thank you for your help. The talk page discussion about the elevation is not active, despite the editors who are currently changing it. The last talk page elevation contribution was in 2007. Viewfinder (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

You're right, sorry. I read the section but not the dates. I did wonder whether the article could mention both heights, but i'm not sure whether it's formally a disputed height or not. It's completely out of my expertise, was just passing by and trying to help. CaptRik (talk) 10:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

The old height is mentioned in the footnote, but perhaps it could be given more weight. The height is not formally disputed by Iran, the new height is on an official website. No information about how and when the old height was measured has ever come to my attention. Viewfinder (talk) 11:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Why dont change the wrong and old information to the true and new information ??!!!!

Please convert this false and shamless information of damavand elevation to the correct and new elevation that's NASA and so many competent organizations that have been calculate that , (( 5610m is false and 5671m is correct )) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horamantarh (talk • contribs) 08:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page and on the article's talk page. CaptRik (talk) 10:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

The Boat Race nomination at WP:ITN/R

Since you participated in the nomination of The 160th Boat Race at WP:ITNC, I am writing to let you know that you might like to participate in the following discussion at WP:ITN/R. 86.170.98.9 (talk) 23:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Neo-Catholicism article

Saw your comment to Sandstein on the neo-Catholicism article. I would be happy to talk to you about it.Circa Corleone (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I will post my reasons for the various templates I added to article on it's talk page. Please do not remove them, until we have discussed. Thanks. CaptRik (talk) 07:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Comment: I did not remove your tags. I will no longer be involved in the editing process. I may defend the article if another effort is made to have it deleted as I have seen disturbing signs of political bias at work in deletion campaigns, including references to established traditional Catholic publications as "fringe hate groups." Ridiculous and childish stuff. I thought Wikipedia editing guidelines prohibited ad hominem arguments and name-calling, but the "guidelines" here seem curiously malleable. I have had enough of the process. I am curious, however. Which sources do you deem "unreliable" and why? I find use of the term "unreliable" here to be roughly equivalent to "not my cup of tea." Circa Corleone (talk) 12:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Further Comment: As I said, I am no longer involved in the editing process for this entry, but was wondering if you had reasons, and what they are, for posting the warning that some or all of the sources in the entry might be unreliable. Would you mind explaining this? I think it's a rather serious accusation and should be supported by evidence. Thank you.Circa Corleone (talk) 00:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Still Further Comment: Although I am not the one who removed your maintenance tag, you asked me to talk to you about it before any further removal. This is my third polite request to talk to you and obtain an explanation of why you put up a tag stating that some or all of the sources in the article I created are not reliable. Again, which sources and why? Also, I would like to know why the entry about this current in the Catholic Church is not notable when "Catholic traditionalism" is deemed notable and is also described as a "current." What is your basis for denying general notability, given that the Catholic Church and its affairs are by definition generally notable? Do you have any expertise in this area, or is it just that you personally think it is not notable? If you won't talk about these things, then I will reconsider my decision to abstain from further edits and will take down your maintenance tags myself if someone else doesn't. I don't think you have the right to hoist warning flags about an article and then provide no basis for them.Circa Corleone (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Addendum: Regarding your flag concerning a contributor's "close connection" to the subject, the Wiki COI guideline does not define conflict of interest as "close connection" to the subject. Any expert on a subject who creates an initial article by definition is closely connected to the subject in which he has acquired expertise. Anyone is free to edit the article for any possible bias. What is your specific basis for citing the COI guideline? Again, if I cannot talk to you about this, as you yourself suggested, I must assume that collaboration is not possible and that the tag should be removed, even if others may edit the article.Circa Corleone (talk) 18:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, apologies for the lengthy delay. I was away for unplanned reasons. I'm catching up with things over the next few days. CaptRik (talk) 11:47, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

ITN credit

ThaddeusB (talk) 19:01, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Help Desk - Labels

Thank you. I started the discussion on labels !!

Henry Townsend 16:21, 5 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrytow (talk • contribs)

You're very welcome. Good luck with your editing. CaptRik (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for your help. Lizamaga (talk) 03:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem - glad to see your infobox is appearing correctly now! CaptRik (talk) 17:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again

Thank you for your help. Lizamaga (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for re-editting the article

Thanks for re-edit

If you want the latest article,please go to NHK World or NHK News(English)for more updated articles for Hiroshima Landslide 2014,this is my first time on Wikipedia,So sorry for the sources,I don`t know to process the copy and paste the link to the article,so i`d change only the easiest one on your article. I`m from Hiroshima City,Japan 20km away from the Landslide site. カツカシ (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

ITN for Silk Road (marketplace)

--Spencer^T♦C 09:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

UFC 157

Hello, why was the original attempt at creating a UFC 157 article previously deleted? Is it possible to create a new UFC 157 article?

UFC 157

HELLO??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theepicwarrior (talk • contribs) 07:16, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

UFC 157

Hello, why was the original attempt at a UFC 157 article previously deleted? Is it possible to create a new UFC 157 article?

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

CaptRik (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #16023 was submitted on Jun 22, 2016 08:04:08. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 08:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CaptRik. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CaptRik. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, CaptRik. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, CaptRik. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)