User talk:Cirt/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Crumplezone

HEY YOU, WHY ARE YOU DELETING Crumplezone, AND YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DELETED DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!?? 75.142.152.104 (talk) 04:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:AFD, then Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crumplezone. -- Cirt (talk) 12:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Lilias Rider Haggard article

Hi, I was just wondering why this article was deleted after I provided a second reference and more biographical details.

Thank you. Jcspurrell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcspurrell (talk • contribs) 16:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Was deleted, after deletion discussion at WP:AFD process, here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lilias Rider Haggard. Would be willing to provide a copy, as a subpage within your userspace, if you wish to work on a proposed draft version. -- Cirt (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

Thank you for your comments. However, I do still do not understand why the article was deleted. In the discussion, I said that I would provide more references and information. I began to do so, but the article was deleted before I had time to finish. If possible, I would like to take you up on your offer of working on a draft version on a subpage within my userspace so that I can continue to add information as and when I have time.

Many thanks.

Jcspurrell Jcspurrell (talk) 20:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Jcspurrell/Lilias Rider Haggard. -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Jcspurrell (talk) 21:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You are most welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 21:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Selena FAC

I think I took care of most of the concerns, the article is rather short because she had a short career, and I want to stick to the basics, not add extra information about her tours, etc. Secret ^account 03:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Link please? -- Cirt (talk) 04:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Selena/archive1 Secret ^account 18:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I added citations where I could removed where I couldn't find it in the book, and beefed up the article just a little bit, I don't want to go into overdetail. Thanks Secret ^account 23:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I reworded it to impact and merged the two sentence paragraph. Secret ^account 14:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I may need your help, I already broke 3RR on Selena trying to keep it as reliable as possible, protect the page please so the revert war will Secret ^account 22:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I will request full prot, at WP:RFPP. -- Cirt (talk) 22:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

FAR ping

Hi Cirt - Could you please revisit your comments at the FARs for Selena and Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident? Also the one for Gliding - more specificity is needed regarding the sections you believe should be expanded: what information do you think is missing? Thank you, Dana boomer (talk) 13:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done! Also, Dana boomer, I wanted to thank you for the courteous, polite, and kind way in which you have approached me to inquire about this - it is a rare and most appreciated quality. -- Cirt (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for the quick response! (And you're welcome!) Dana boomer (talk) 14:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Topsite (www)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Topsite (www). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Rich Farmbrough, 15:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC).

Okay, thanks for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 15:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider

Is there a reason you are now systematically sending perfectly notable subjects to deletion, other than the fact you thought I was rude to you on your talk page? Two films that were released in theaters in another nation are indeed notable.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

After I closed an AFD on a related topic, I began to investigate the related purported "merge" topics, and found that the parent "merge" targets, also notably fail WP:NOTE, lack of significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. -- Cirt (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

They are movies. They are notable. These articles are also just made. Give us time to work on the articles before sending everything into the trashbin.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The use of bold is not necessary. The articles could have been worked on in userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 21:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Ryulong

I'm terribly sorry to bother you about this, but Ryulong is concerned that you're AfDing articles that he created as a gesture of retaliation for his poor word choice on your usertalk; he's also quite distressed that this is happening when he's stuck on poor-grade WiFi and therefore can't really participate in the AfDs.

Could you do something to assuage these concerns? Thank you. DS (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

After I closed an AFD on a related topic, I began to investigate the related purported "merge" topics, and found that the parent "merge" targets, also notably fail WP:NOTE, lack of significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. -- Cirt (talk) 21:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

AN discussion regarding username blocks

Please see here. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider

Perhaps a mass nomination is in order?

• Kamen Rider Knight
• Kamen Rider Ryuki
• Kamen Rider Scissors
• Kamen Rider Zolda
• Kamen Rider Raia
• Kamen Rider Gai
• Kamen Rider Ouja
• Kamen Rider Tiger
• Kamen Rider Imperer
• Kamen Rider Femme
• Kamen Rider Ryuga
• Kamen Rider Verde
• Kamen Rider Odin

Active Banana ( ^bananaphone 21:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

To Active Banana (talk · contribs) - Agreed, replied at User talk:Active Banana. -- Cirt (talk) 21:28, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

My "expertise" ends at the fact that this list appears in Kamen Rider Ryuki. I am not sure what is the best way to centralize an organized discussion when the content under question keeps getting shuttled around to other articles, with several AfD's already in progress. Active Banana ( ^bananaphone 21:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Mission Dolores mural

I have removed the COI several times now, because I am handling this issue and I am working with Ben to resolve any problems. Please use the talk page to explain any continuing problems as you see them. As a fully disinterested third party, I don't see a need for editors to keep adding maintenance tag when others are aware of the issue and are working to resolve any outstanding issues. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with experts working on Wikipedia in their field, so the repeated adding of this tag does not help the working environment or encourage good faith. If there are COI problems that nobody has handled, use the talk page and explain them. I don't understand why editors think it helps to keep adding the tag. The COI is already explained on the talk page with the notable editor tag. Please review it. Viriditas (talk) 21:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good, thank you! :) -- Cirt (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Question

I'm curious as to why, after being told multiple times that you were notified of the AN thread, that you asserted on AN that I had not notified you. Your response to Giftiger wunsch's statement here appears to acknowledge that I notified you. Did you miss not only the notification I left on your talk page but also the multiple clarifications from Giftiger wunsch and me? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You are correct. I am sorry about that. I apologize. It was a mistake on my part. -- Cirt (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Kamen rider eurodata.png

I've removed the free copyright tags from this image. Do you think perhaps you could unlist it from "possibly unfree images" as it has been determined a year or so ago that it is actually not free?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. -- Cirt (talk) 00:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Quick demo of puppet functioning admin

Cirt, you don't have real power and not free in your decisions regarding nomination and deleting the articles. You have a puppet master who telling you what to do. Look at the article describing ROLZ algorithm. It is published more than 3 years ago. It has no references since then and no explanation. It speaks about algorithm presumably implemented in WinRK data compression software but WinRK did not say a word about algorithm. However WinRK is a corporation with influence and should you remove this article you yourself will be removed from admin position. Is that correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by C-processor (talk • contribs) 04:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The article, WinRK, was previously deleted by two admins, Geni (talk · contribs) and Rjd0060 (talk · contribs). Not sure what you mean by the rest, the language used in the above comment is unclear, perhaps you could be more specific? -- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

How can you explain that article is back there? What I mean by the language that someone else decided what is deleted and what stays in Wikipedia not you. C-processor (talk) 04:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:AFD. Then please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 04:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You move discussion to wrong direction. You make it look like my article is wrong and I try to keep it by pointing to other junk. That is not correct. My article was right and even ROLZ topic is right. ROLZ algorithm is perfect. The article about ROLZ is junk not the algorithm and this junk stays and you can not remove it because you are nobody. And there were other who tried to remove but because they do not make decision here as well the article is restored. Now, do not pretend that you are important person but tell us all who in Wikipedia has real power? C-processor (talk) 08:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears you are complaining about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polar Tree, where the consensus to delete was quite clear. Perhaps if you like, I could move a version of that page's history to a subpage in your userspace, where you can work on a proposed draft version from which to improve it? -- Cirt (talk) 08:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The consensus means nothing because because it was reached by wrong people. Only one was computer programmer who voted to keep. I want to have text on my article on my subpage. C-processor (talk) 04:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:C-processor/Polar Tree. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Joan Holmes for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Joan Holmes, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Holmes until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Wolfview (talk) 04:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

PrepExtra

Hi. I've noticed that when you move stuff from prep extra you also move the PrepExtra-specific stuff too, towit: "When copying an update from this page to the Queue, please take the update closest to the TOP of the page, then delete the update from this page and add another copy of Template:Did you know/Clear to the BOTTOM of this page. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk)". I just now, and have fixed it with an edit like this one. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

PrepExtra should be made to just have one set, just like the others, and be called, "Prep 3". :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, commented, at WT:DYK. -- Cirt (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Mlang.at.elisanet.fi

User is requesting unblock. IIRC we stopped blocking email addresses a while back, and I also take heed of his argument that s/he uses the same name on fiwiki seriously, especially since a) other-language Wikipedias have allowed some email addies as usernames and b) with SUL we now have to deal with those usernames. Daniel Case (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I will unblock the account. :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, commented, at User talk:Mlang.Finn. -- Cirt (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

VESK

Hi Cirt,

I know this was a long time ago now, and doubt that you remember, but I was wondering if i can put back the VESK article that i posted. I have now found information in Computer Weekly written by Citrix about VESK and what they offer. Is that a trusted enough source to put the article back? http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2010/09/06/242630/Virtual-desktop-helps-recruitment-firm-slash-IT-costs-and-speed-up-expansion.htm

There is another PR article i have found, http://www.prfire.co.uk/press-release/astbury-marsden-cut-it-costs-by-40-per-cent-with-virtual-desktops-from-vesk-26660.html, that goes in to a little more detail. Also there are youTube videos on how it works at http://www.youtube.com/user/veskvirtualdesktop.

Please could you let me know if this is acceptable to re-create the article.

Kind Regards, Appipark (talk) 14:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I will userfy it for you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Appipark/VESK -- Cirt (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

An FAR ping

Hi Cirt, thanks for your comments on the FAR for Premier League. Could you please revisit it for the citation issues, Cordless Larry has added fact tags which have all been resolved and there have been a few structural changes. Could you also please elaborate on your LEAD issue? Is there anything in particular that stands out as missing? Thanks, Woody (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I will revisit the page. :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, will probably try to revisit again, at time of FARC. :) -- Cirt (talk) 16:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for that. I have dealt with all the citation requests now. Hopefully it won't need to go to FARC, regards. Woody (talk) 18:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Voluntary Content Rating

Hi Cirt,

Why did you delete the Article about the Voluntary Content Rating with just one vote?

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Voluntary_Content_Rating

I just discovered the deletion, because you broke my links to the site, for example on http://draketo.de/licht/ich/meine-seite-ist-ab-18

When I read the article (more than a year ago) it was very useful for webmasters, because it gave very clear instructions how to mark your site as not-for-children, and in germany a new law is forcing us (since the beginning of this year) to mark all our sites appropriately – or enforce that people can only view them between 22:00 and 7:00 (don’t ask me for my opinion on the politicians who decided on that. My answer likely wouldn’t be fit for Wikipedia).

Since it’s deleted, I can’t check, if the article changed to unuseful since then.

Best wishes, Draketo (talk)

PS: Yes, I twittered/dented about that when I discovered that the site is gone. No, this is no try at meatpuppetry but the result of temporary rage on having my info-link wrecked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArneBab (talk • contribs) 21:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd be happy to provide a copy for you to work on as a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. :) -- Cirt (talk) 21:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Lanark Grammar School 1

Cirt, please look at the userpage before blocking the account; could you please unblock it and the other three? It appears to be used by a particular school under the supervision of one of our contributors, and I am discussing the matter here. I think you could help us out by looking into the matter; wait before reblocking. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 08:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, unblocked all three. -- Cirt (talk) 14:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Deleted entry

I created a profile with the Username Certero which has been deleted? I understand this is because the username advertises the organisation. Please can you advise.

When searching for the company in Google the results produce the page to say this has been deleted. How do I now remove this account?

I've created a separate account and profile which i now beleive conforms to the wikipedia guidelines. Please can you confirm.

Thanks,

Laura —Preceding unsigned comment added by PCPow (talk • contribs) 09:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

This new account, again, seems to be for advertising purposes. -- Cirt (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

AN discussion notification

A general discussion at WP:AN#AfD's generally closed too soon also involves some of your edits. You are invited to give your view on this as well. Fram (talk) 11:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Commented there. Seems to be a problem with WP:AFD/O. -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Two Transformers AfDs

So with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broadside (Transformers) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brakedown, are you sure these couldn't be reconsidered for a delete? In the Broadside one, we have 4 keeps...3 of which are just WP:ITSNOTABLE calls, while the 4th doesn't offer a reason at all, and was a "keep or merge" to boot. For Brakedown, there's 3 keeps...2 "itsnotable" and 1 "keep them all" which IMO is not a reason at all". Maybe I read too literally into the "AfD is not a vote" ideal, but empty drivel like this for !votes should be treated like they don't even exist. I have no intention to bring it to DRV btw; your close isn't wrong and I think the DRV process is abused far too often in that manner. This is just an "are you sure?" request. Thanks. Tarc (talk) 14:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Best to bring further discussion about secondary source coverage to the talk page, perhaps tag the pages with notability tag in a few weeks, and bring to AFD again in a month or two. -- Cirt (talk) 14:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. Tarc (talk) 23:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

Hello, Cirt. You have new messages at Erik's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Will respond there. -- Cirt (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Deshastha Brahmin

Hi Cirt - this is regarding the recent GAR for Deshastha Brahmin article. Do you have any comments on this Talk:Deshastha_Brahmin/GA1. Thanks. Zuggernaut (talk) 03:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I would strongly recommend another peer review, first, then renominating to try for WP:GAN. If you wish, you can keep me apprised, and I would be happy to take another look at the article once it is at the peer review stage, after those remaining issues have been fixed. :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I will make the changes, do the peer review then re-nominate. I appreciate your time on this. Thanks for the feedback, it has been helpful. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Please, feel free to keep me posted, I can check back in on it at that later stage. :) -- Cirt (talk) 04:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Will do so. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! :) -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm back again :) user:Shakher59 who has provided the pictures for the article has questions about the images. Can you comment at [1]. Thanks. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:17, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See for example, Commons:Template:Information. -- Cirt (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Your Concern At RfC

I have provided an outside view as to what the user KnowIG is doing. I fully agree as to what you are saying and I am in full support of your feelings and how this situation gets dealt with. There is a temper problem going on and I would like that you try to not respond to his comments until a verdict is reached. This is for your sanity. :) Thank you. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 12:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright. -- Cirt (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. If you need to respond to another editor's question you can, just responding to the nasty remarks can just provoke him/her. I am trying to calm him down. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 16:54, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Resolution (Proposed)

I talked to the KnowIG and we have decided that the majority of the problems were due to reverting which lead to nasty messages about reverting etc. So:

We have proposed that is there is a revert for something such as grammar or spelling that you will fix it instead of reverting it. It is much easier that way. If it is reverted and you forget to fix it then he will leave a KIND note on your talk page, which will avoid nasty comments. I see that most of the problems are coming from another user who is going by the name TT. I am going to file an ANI for KnowIG so that TT is not allowed to have contact with KnowIG. Is this proposed plan Okay? It seems that it will resolve the problems. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 23:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Please may I draw your attention to my comment on this proposal. ╟─TreasuryTag►Speaker─╢ 08:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Please y'all take this off my user talk page to somewhere else now, ya hear? Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

(Okay, so I don't normally respond to others' pages, but since I'm already here...)

No problem. Great work on the article, whilst AFD isn't cleanup, you could've fooled me. :) Strange Passerby (talk) 23:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 16:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Dup category cleanup bot requested

Bot is now approved, and as be active. Let me know if you see any problems. Best :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!-- Cirt (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

David Andrews, Xchanging

Hi Cirt,

Why was the David Andrews, of Xchanging Ltd, page deleted? Should we have provided more references to him and his businesses? the company that he is CEO of is a FTSE 250 company, with over 8000 employees! some of them were quite upset when they heard he had been deleted!

How can we reinstate the page?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rowing101 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Link to specific page, please? -- Cirt (talk) 16:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

[David Andrews] Thanks for your help Rowing101 (talk) 07:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cirt, am watching your talk page (from the Most Hated Family AFD), and saw this section. Did some searching, found some stuff, now at ANI. You may want to weigh in. Strange Passerby (talk) 10:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 21:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Just Kait (band) - meant to be deleted

There's an article Just Kait (band) that was apparently meant to be deleted but hasn't, and the AfD is now in the article, I think because someone may have moved the debate into the article. Since you closed the debate, could you have a look and see whether to delete the article? Christopher Connor (talk) 02:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 02:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Improving Transformers articles

I thought the article was well written and a good example of what happens when people pay decent attention to a clearly notable subject. I wish to ask you a question about the transformers franchise. A lot of Transformers articles have ADF and in my opinion for good reason. (Its a same the creditability of some have been undermined by sockpuppeting.) Nevertheless what do you think can be done to improve the articles. Dwanyewest (talk) 02:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

You might try working on one, as a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace, and try to inquire with WikiProjects like WP:TELEVISION and WP:FILMS, as to how to get it up to WP:GA or WP:FA quality. -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

MysticFireInc (UAA/block) question

Hi Cirt, quick question. I posted a warning/welcome on User_talk:MysticFireInc regarding their username. Should I have ARV'd it to WP:UAA for a block review instead? When I read the guidelines on such it seems some of the wording is kind of ambiguous:

From WP:UAA: Clearly inappropriate and a blatant violation of the username policy, ---> and <--- Has made recent edits (within the last 2–3 weeks at the outside). Accounts that haven't edited in 3 weeks or more should not be reported.

From WP:U: Except in very clear-cut cases, it is preferable that you report users to these noticeboards only when they have made at least one recent edit.

Yet, that mentions for blatant violations (which this is listed elsewhere as) that it should be reported.

So, I'm curious if you think I took the correct route, or if reporting it to UAA would have been more appropriate, or if either are equally appropriate options. Trying to "learn my way" through some of the vagaries here, so your input would be appreciated. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 03:15, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Either way would have been fine, you could have gone to WP:UAA. -- Cirt (talk) 03:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Much thanks for the answer and your time. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 03:29, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 03:32, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: Thank you

Cool, no problem. Thanks for helping out at that article as well. Happy editing. Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 03:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 03:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

ANI thread

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 10:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

• Whoops, I notice you were informed of ths by User:Strange Passerby anyway. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 10:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, -- Cirt (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Portal

I saw you are really good with Portals, so maybe you can help with Portal:Tirana or Portal:Albania?--Vinie007 11:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Would suggest inquiring at talkpages of relevant WikiProjects, and going for WP:PPREV. Please also take a look through some of the portals I have helped to get to featured status. :) -- Cirt (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

IP 125.164.5.125

Most of it was good faith edits, there was only one case of acual vandalism and several cases of adding a red-linked category. Please unblock. Thanks Secret ^account 15:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done! Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Literary societies at Washington & Jefferson College

Hello. On September 2, you tagged Literary societies at Washington & Jefferson College as being under review at WP:GAN. I'm the nominator, and I'm wondering how the review is going. Thank you! --GrapedApe (talk) 17:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Yup, it is on my list, will get to it soon. :) -- Cirt (talk) 19:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Right on.--GrapedApe (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina edit history, per GFDL

Because material from Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina has been broken out into several other articles, the GFDL requires that the edit history of this article be preserved. Please find someplace to move or merge it for this purpose. Thanks! bd2412 T 22:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears you have gone ahead and taken care of this already. No objections from me. :) -- Cirt (talk) 19:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

RPP

Hello Cirt, you might be interested in this discussion at RPP regarding a template you protected. Thanks, Airplaneman ✈ 02:28, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't see the link active there at the moment, but I will defer to consensus among reviewing admins. :) -- Cirt (talk) 19:38, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

May I go ahead and unprotect (it's been re-requested - I'd downgrade to semi) and see how that works? Airplaneman ✈ 20:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Again, per my prior response, will defer to judgment from that page. -- Cirt (talk) 20:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina again

I note that you ruled this a DELETE at AfD but it is still up... Best, —Tim Carrite (talk) 03:33, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears to now be deleted. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

deletion of stimulator wikipedia article

Hi Cirt,

I noticed today that the band I just joined had their WP page deleted. I noticed that you were the one who deleted it. I am writing to you to ask you to please restore the page. Stimulator has released three CDs distributed worldwide by Universal Records Europe. The band currently has the title track to the new Macy's Campaign. You can watch the commercial nationally right now on any major television network or listen to it on the radio. They have covered Olivia Newton john's Magic and the single was released through MGM Australia. The two founders of the band are Geoff Tyson (Joe Satriani's protege) and Susan Hyatt (ex Pillbox, Pandoras and MP3TV VJ). All of Stimulator's music is featured on Susan Hyatt's Rockstar Workout DVD which is charting in the top 20 on AMAZON best selling new Fitness DVD's. Stimulator opened the US Arena Tours for Duran Duran and the GO-GO's. Stimulator has had several songs licensed to major TV shows and a Disney film. We recently received endorsements by Sennheiser, Daisy Rock Guitars, Steve Clayton Picks, Luna and Gibson guitars. The band is working very hard(we are on tour right now) and would sincerely appreciate it if you would undelete it.

Respectfully yours, Michaelbrentstimulator (talk) 07:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Michael Brent http://www.stimulatortheband.com Bass Guitar

I would suggest reading WP:COI. However, feel free to work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 19:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Question

O great master of featured articles, I bring a question before thee.

In terms of the article Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass, because each "chapter" of the collection is essentially a separate essay written at a different point in time than all the others and is inherently separate, though holding the same general themes and overall point, would it be proper of me to put all of the essay titles in the Content section with a description of the subject that each covers? I would try to keep it just as an obvious, general overview, so as not to fall into OR, and would reference the page numbers themselves.

Is this appropriate for a "book" article or not? I feel like it would add a lot of useful information to the article and even some context if I did so, but I wanted to check with you first to see if its right to do so. Silverseren^C 22:08, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, I would suggest you first do some more secondary source research, eg reviews, etc, and defer to the models used in those formats. -- Cirt (talk) 19:41, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The Most Hated Family in America

You call what you're doing "work?" --AStanhope (talk) 21:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

"Effort", and "research", and "writing", would be better descriptive words. -- Cirt (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

"Bloody good work" is of course also a better description, although you could feel free to substitute the first word for something else if you saw fit. John Carter (talk) 22:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, John Carter (talk · contribs), the kind words about my effort at the article The Most Hated Family in America are most appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 22:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

FARC: Bangladesh

Hey mate, how much more work is required to keep the article an FA? I'm willing to work on it as much I can. Please, answer to the FARC page. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 04:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 10:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

HI :)

Hi Cirt :) I've been an admirer of your AfD work in the past, and even when I wasn't a sysop, I've come to you directly to help me close a few AfDs. I wanted your inputs on a recent thread that NuclearWarfare took up on my talk page where he guided me in good faith that perhaps I was closing AfDs before the seven days limit was over. I've replied to him on my talk page and would really appreciate it if you give me your guidance on my talk page on which AfDs should I be choosing to close. It'll help me refine the work I'm doing out here :) Sincere regards. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 14:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, replied there. -- Cirt (talk) 16:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Alex Nackman / Article Deletion

September 20, 2010

Cirt- I created the Wiki page for singer/songriter/artist Alex Nackman back in 2006. I have just found out that it has recently been deleted in the last week, with your nomination finalizing its deletion. I am really disappointed here. I've tried to follow all the Wiki rules and keep things as impartial and currently informative as possible. Alex Nackman is an established independent artist/musician from New York. He has toured over 700 shows worldwide and released 5 albums that are available almost everywhere and certainly online. He has also had roughly 40 songs placed on various television shows in the U.S. and UK, not to mention over 500,000 views at his myspace. Though he is not a major label artist or on the front cover of Rolling Stone, he has done enough where I think he deserves to have his Wiki page re-instated. I used to manage him and do not anymore, but I still help out and keep things current on the web for Alex and his management. I have never inflated his Wiki page with false or opinionated text. I have only provided the facts and some background bio information. If you just google his name, there are dozens of pages and information on Alex Nackman.

I truly hope you and the Wki team will help reconsider. There were other strong "keep" nominations for this article in previous discussions.

Musicman5 (talk) Mark —Preceding undated comment added 20:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC).

Suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. If you wish, I could provide a copy of that deleted page, for such a purpose. :) -- Cirt (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Cirt- That would be great. Can you please provide? Also, what exactly do you mean by "subpage" of my userspace? Thanks.

Musicman5 (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Mark

 Done, now at User:Musicman5/Alex Nackman. -- Cirt (talk) 03:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Rolltide pisco

Hi, this user seems to understand what they did wrong. Mind if I unblock? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

No objections from me, sounds good. :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Block 94.2.116.156

Thanks for that; it was getting annoying! MartinSFSA (talk) 05:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 05:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Suzannah B. Troy

Why did you delete Suzannah B. Troy ? Courcelles had relisted this article for deletion on Friday. You deleted this page before edits and rewrites could be made. If you would have read the citations, which I kept emphasising, you would have seen that there were other citations that mentioned the individual, not just The New York Daily News article. Can I request that the page be returned for further edits until Friday ? I will be posting a similar comment on Courcelles's page, too. --Maslowsneeds (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, restored, relisted, back at AFD. :) -- Cirt (talk) 10:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi, what happened ? I had the chance to make one edit this morning. I work during the day, and I only get a chance to make edits very late after work, or very early in the mornings. According to Courcelles's relisting, we had until Friday to complete further edits. And look, somebody came along to say that this article should be kept. There are a few more cites that I want to add. As this page is open to the community for edits, I welcome participation to help achieve a neutral tone. --Maslowsneeds (talk) 01:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, see above. -- Cirt (talk) 01:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Possible religious controversies task force

If you know of any individuals who might be interested in dealing with articles relating to "religious controversies" as a whole, I would appreciate you letting them know of the possibility of a group specifically designated to deal with matters of religious controversies at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Possible task force. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 15:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the notice, will take a look at it. -- Cirt (talk) 20:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Mau Piailug

Hey sorry, that was all I had to say really. Didn't mean to take over. It was only a comment - I will shift it to the page's talk to avoid confusion. I have been helping out with a FA nom and forgot that GAs usually only have one reviewer. Kahuroa (talk) 21:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Spykey808

User was falsely warned for a level 4 warning but was previously reverted + warned by me for removal of content and later ceased to remove content. He re-added his edits but I don't think the block is necessary nor is the user disruptively editing. Ie- learned from mistakes. I hope you reconsider the block. Tommy! 21:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

No objections to the unblock. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:11, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Growl

PhilKnight has given you a pack of Wolves! Wolves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. This pack of Wolves must be fed three times a day and they will be your faithful companions forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a wolf, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of wolves by adding {{subst:Wolves}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 21:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Margo&Gladys block

Please reconsider the block on Margo&Gladys. The name does not appear to be a clear violation of the Username policy. The two names represent a couple of the owner's cats per the user.Sandcherry (talk) 02:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, unblocked, per cats. -- Cirt (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! -- Sandcherry (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Double welcome?

Er, why did you put a welcome message here after I already put almost the same one? It seems repetitive and confusing for the newbies: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABtearney&action=historysubmit&diff=386444075&oldid=386374891 Plus, my message was tailored to the classroom program in which this person is participating. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:17, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Ditto: User talk:Ackmanistan; User talk:Adw7‎; User talk:Lolita2010‎; and User talk:SWeatherbee2010‎. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I thought they would like some cookies. Feel free to remove it, as you wish. :( -- Cirt (talk) 13:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I left the cookies and your cheerful welcome, but deleted the repeated links and repeated info about signing with tildes. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Image rename

I don't know/can't remember how to propose an image rename on Commons, so can you change File:Cho.jpg to something more specific, perhaps File:Margaret Cho 2009? thanks, CTJF83 chat 16:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 02:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for the very nice welcome. --Policygirl (talk) 16:04, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Mau Piailug photos

Hi Cirt. I have asked some Flickr users for permission to use their pix in the project. I have had a few replies. One asks me to email him "and we can talk" which makes me think they are seeing dollar signs, haha. But one seems promising - a Flickr has given me the email of a friend who apparently wants to email me good photos of Mau Piailug, Hokule'a, etc for use on Wikipedia/Commons. Seeing as you are an OTRS volunteer, I thought I might ask you for advice on how to proceed before I email them. This a bit different to the Flickr images I have transferred over in the past because the it looks like the pics aren't on Flickr so I can't use the trusty bot to verify. Kahuroa (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest reading, commons:Commons:OTRS and commons:Commons:Email templates. -- Cirt (talk) 02:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, will do. Kahuroa (talk) 02:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Papita Inc

Hi Cirt, Papita Inc. (just blocked) already got a new username (sadly, not via changing their old one as recommended - they didnt understand that part). They are one of User:Thelmadatter's students and have publicly announced the username "change" to User:Papita_Naranja. Just figured I'd mention it in case that affected the block type (and so I can learn something new). Best, ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 03:30, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

If they created that, as a separate new account, and are not editing on behalf of any group, organization, or company, then nothing more needs be done about it, at this point in time. -- Cirt (talk) 03:31, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

(Correct, school student with no ill intent, created new one when warned instead of req new one - mentoring one of Thelmadatter's other students, hence following this).

Thanks for allowing me the learning experience and explaining. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 03:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 03:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

question about delete decision

Hello Cirt, I would like to ask you about your decision to delete an article, which is not clear to me. Please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_Geodetic_Student_Organisation: Was the decision based on having 3 delete votes against 1 not-delete vote, or how could I have avoided the deletion, apart from citing reliable sources and comparing the arguments with the WP:CLUB standards?

Are delete discussions just closed after a certain time without any new posts? I ask because I have the impression that my last argument was not answered anymore, so the discussion was not really finished yet.

Anyway, my questions are just for my understanding. I do not intend to re-enter this article on the English wikipedia again.

best regards Hawei (talk) 13:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. That way, you can take your time preparing it and getting it to a really good level of quality. -- Cirt (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

ok, could you move the deleted article (including the talk page) to a subpage of my userspace? or is it already too late?

Hawei (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC).

 Done, now at User:Hawei/International Geodetic Student Organisation. -- Cirt (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your objection

Regarding your objection to the change on Kendrick Moxon page - the reference to CAN was changed because it was inaccurate. CAN filed bankruptcy after it was assessed a large verdict it could not pay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Margaret's son (talk • contribs) 05:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Please see the notices at your user talk page. Please do not make completely unsourced changes to pages on Wikipedia. -- Cirt (talk) 05:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

• Update: Checkuser has  Confirmed the Margaret's son (talk · contribs) account as a sock of User:Shutterbug, and has blocked it accordingly. -- Cirt (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Mariahicky

Hi Cirt, Recently you've blocked Mariahicky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for 24hrs for causing disruption related to changing the genres on articles without appropriate sourcing. Today upon the end of the block he/she has proceeded to do the same thing they were blocked for at Mariah Carey, Merry Christmas II You and Merry Christmas (Mariah Carey album)‎. Is a lengthier block or other form of action required? -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 15:56, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 15:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

prompt as ever, thank you. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 16:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 16:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Importance chart

Can you tell me how to create an importance chart for WP:Glee, I can't seem to find instructions. CTJF83 chat 18:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, not sure if I can explain it best. You might want to ask CBM (talk · contribs), who runs WP 1.0 bot (talk · contribs). -- Cirt (talk) 19:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, CTJF83 chat 04:13, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Sauganash Hotel

I have responded at Talk:Sauganash Hotel/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:03, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I am watching that page. Replied there. -- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Your AN post about early closes

I responded to it. And speaking about early closes, I closed this AFD special just for DGG :) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:57, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is a good example case study. -- Cirt (talk) 00:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

inre User:Are You The Cow Of Pain?

User:Are You The Cow Of Pain? has been indef-blocked as a sockpuppet of indef-blocked abusive puppetmaster User:Otto4711. His edit contributions, AFD comments, and AFD nominations will require scrutiny. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:54, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, -- Cirt (talk) 03:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

deletion of wikipedia article on Dan Hill

hello, I was looking for information on Dan and was surprised to see that whatever article once existed had been deleted. I looked through the history and discussion here: 04:23, 31 August 2010 Cirt (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Daniel J. Hill" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel J. Hill)

and I thought you might help me understand how this works. I know little about Wikipedia conventions and editing decisions, but I did notice on the remaining page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_J._Hill, that there was some discussion as to whether or not this fellow was for real, if he should have a page, etc.

I can only say that Dan's story is real, and is recounted in no small detail by a Pulitzer-winning author in this book: http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Soldier-James-B-Stewart/dp/0743244591.

You can also read Dan's comments here: http://www.rickrescorla.com/Stand%20And%20Never%20Yield.htm

Anyway, what can I do to spark a discussion and re-instate this page?

thanks!

Lostinatx (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you can work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could make a copy of the deleted article available, if you wish, for just such a purpose. :) -- Cirt (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

fair enough. pls make that copy. I will try to set up a subpage soon. Lostinatx (talk) 05:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

done, I hope. Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lostinatx%5Cdanhill thanks Lostinatx (talk) 05:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Lostinatx/Daniel J. Hill. -- Cirt (talk) 13:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, so how do I promote or publish the page once I'm satisfied w/my edits? thx

Lostinatx (talk) 14:34, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Please, check back with me, first. -- Cirt (talk) 02:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

fine..this may take a couple weeks. not much free time right now. thx Lostinatx (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben 10 Ultimate Alien: Fame

And with this one, the sockpuppet was the sole !vote in the deletion. As the only !vote in the discussion is discredited, and with respects to your deletion, would this not call for a relisting? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. No objections. Good suggestion by you. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 04:03, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

It may yet be deleted... but I just thought it a bit tough that in this latter, his was the only and key !vote. I've gone through his AFD discussions going back to September 14, and tagged more recent ongoing AFD nominations with his puppet status and have struck his !votes in several others. His edits on the other hand will take a lot more work to sort out. Thanks for the above... I can now look at the article and see what might be done. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:06, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

If you check, you will see I am often rapid to respond to requests for restoring and relisting back at AFD. :) Ron Ritzman (talk · contribs) will vouch for my behavior in that regard. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes you are... :) and that trait is appreciated. I just gave the article itself a few tweaks in anticipation of expansion and sourcing,[2] and notified its author that it was restored and the discussion re-opened.[3] Hopefully his talk page having earlier been the recipient of multiple notices of deletion prods has not chased him away from the project. And again... thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, for thanking me. I really do appreciate that, and value your input. -- Cirt (talk) 04:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

And imagine my pleased surprise at a response to my reasoned keep: diff. Neat. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed article rescue award

July 13, 2008 Andrevan@ 08:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

The purple border is just barking ugly. It looks like a refugee from a crayon box. • Ling.Nut 09:05, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, um, see User_talk:Cirt#Note_to_self.2C_Awards_Project_idea_-_.22AFDQUAL.22, above. My idea was to combine those two graphics. I like that rescue barnstar, but that is already in-use, as a sort of separate idea. This is about bringing such things, after a closed AFD, to GA or FA. -- Cirt (talk) 15:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Playboy Records

May I suggest that you reinstate the internal links, which also reflected errors in description that had been corrected--such as the fact that Bobby Taylor (of Bobby Taylor & the Vancouvers) recorded for the label, rather than Bobby Taylor & the Vancouvers? It seems to me that you have gone back to the initially poor, completely unsourced article, without assessing the merits of the individual edits made with a view to improving the article.

On another note, how can an article on the history of ABBA, taken from ABBA's official site, be a completely unacceptable source?

Dreadarthur (talk) 17:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#User_Dreadarthur. -- Cirt (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Lee Michaels

Would you please point out what unsourced material I added to the Lee Michaels page, relative to the recent removal of other unsourced material (in relation to Michaels' apparent restaurant ownership). That material was not added by me, but should be able to be readily sourced, if one wished to be helpful. For example, here is a discussion board link that at least confirms the existence and ownership of the restaurant. Not a strong independent source, but an independent source nonetheless: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/54215

Again, could you please provide specifics of your reservations in relation to my own contributions to this page?

Dreadarthur (talk) 18:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#User_Dreadarthur. -- Cirt (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

re DYK for Julia Pirie

Thanks for the DYK notice, and any part you may have played in moving it through! Cheers and happy editing, Herostratus (talk) 18:17, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Samantha Spiegel Wikipedia

Regarding the Samantha Spiegel Wikipedia page, I AM Samantha Spiegel and was in the middle of working on putting in credits and sources. As far as I'm concerned, nothing was defamatory towards myself or my ex-fiancé. Could you please elaborate so I understand better? But it was taken down immediately before I could source or credit anything.

Many thanks, Samantha Alix Spiegel (talk) 06:13, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears I have not deleted this? -- Cirt (talk) 06:15, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Note to self, Awards Project idea - "AFDQUAL"

Idea for Awards Project - "AFDQUAL"

1. WP:AFD to WP:GA, "The DELGA Award"
2. WP:AFD to WP:FA, "The DELFA Award"

• Graphics?
• See also, WP:FOUR, WP:CROWN. Template:The Rescue Barnstar 3, Template:The Barnstar of Recovery.

-- Cirt (talk) 21:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

"Rescue to Quality Award", something like that. -- Cirt (talk) 01:17, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• I used to make awards, some of which are still popular (see my bio page), but other folks have more advanced image editors that make better images. I could at least try, if you want one made. • Ling.Nut

Not sure yet what stage this idea is in, but sure, can't hurt. I was thinking two separate graphics for usage as two stages of the possible Award:

1. File:Rescuebarnstar.png combined somehow with File:Symbol support vote.svg
2. File:Rescuebarnstar.png combined somehow with File:Cscr-featured with shadow.svg

Whaddya think? -- Cirt (talk) 01:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

AFD to FA? Do such articles even exist (or exist in quantities large enough to warrant a barnstar)? [Is your talk page getting ready for archiving?] • Ling.Nut 01:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I do not know yet. I am going to try to get in touch with individuals that might be able to somehow pass through parameters using {{ArticleHistory}} to do that. Any ideas? -- Cirt (talk) 01:48, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• Both Geometry guy & Sandy would either know, or would know who knows. Maybe Carl. I don't know how to do it offhand, no. I could probably figure something out. • Ling.Nut

Who is this famed mysterious "Carl" person? -- Cirt (talk) 01:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• That would be User:CBM. :-) • Ling.Nut 02:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks. I will inquire with CBM (talk · contribs). ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Query posted, at User_talk:CBM#Query_on_AFD_statistics. -- Cirt (talk) 02:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• To be honest, I doubt there are enough AfD to GA or FA's to justify an award. I would be very surprised if there ere ven one FA, and surprised if there were more than 5 GAs. • Ling.Nut 02:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, perhaps that is why it is best to compile data on the statistics of it, first. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Now at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Query_on_AFD_statistics. -- Cirt (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Sarah-Louise Young AfD

Is it really THE Sarah Louise Young whose article got deleted?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sarah_Louise_Young
http://web.archive.org/web/20071013185152/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Louise_Young

Is that a mistake?! I missed the AfD but that woman has at least 5 awards and is very known especially in Germany. How can that be non-notable?! I can also remember that she was several times present in German mainstream media. Testales (talk) 17:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you can work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace page. If you wish it, I can make it available for you to work on, for such a purpose. -- Cirt (talk) 02:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I actually would prefer to take directly to a DRV. With 5 awards (listed on the official page[4]) and some presence in media it should actually be a fairly obvious case looking at the current WP:PORNBIO. There are even many erotic shops named after her[5][6][7] and director Hans Moser founded a company with her name[8]. So the only explanation I have for the deletion would be that half of the article was deleted due to a lack of references. Sarah Young was the "successor" of Teresa Orlowski and the EXPRESS still lists her on rank 8 of the most popular porn stars[9]. But as she was active before the WWW was really developed, it is hard to nearly impossible to find high quality references with just online searching. Just to give an example, I've not been able so far to find a reliable source for the winner list of the Venus Awards of 1997 and even the only book I found at Amazon seems to use Wikipedia as source. As I already have another article to take care of in my user space I don't think that I could improve the archived version of 1997 much with my limited time and alone. Testales (talk) 07:21, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It would help to demonstrate possible notability or not, and also to improve the page itself before moving a BLP page back into main article space, to work on it in your userspace, first. -- Cirt (talk) 15:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I more thought of Wikipedia:DRV#Temporary_review "Request this if you want to use the content elsewhere (such as in other articles), you suspect the article has been wrongly deleted but are unable to tell without seeing what exactly was deleted, with option 1 that is "The article temporarily restored for all to examine during a review.". Option 2 would be "The article restored to your userspace so you can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to deletion." that is what you suggest. But the reason that led to deletion was "Fails WP:PORNBIO" which actually can not be as she has won notable awards AND was present on main stream media. So that's why I clearly suspect the article has been wrongly deleted. It would be a different case if it had been deleted because nothing of it could be proved with references. I am not sure if I can find good references for all that which was written in the original archived article that had actually no references by todays standards for BLP at all. So far I can only say that she appears in several issues[10] of the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series which are "Designed for speechwriters, journalists, writers, researchers, students"[11] and a guide to British Pornographic Actors[12]. Her Wikipedia BLP is by the way used by MANY external sites like on eBay[13] which even lists TV appearances (don't know if that came from Wikipedia too). So a deletion of that is not helpful at all. The fact the all original editors are inactive doesn't make it better. Testales (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

We are talking about a poorly sourced BLP page here. Best to first at least attempt to improve it in your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's indeed very poorly sourced but that was not the reason for deletion. Because there are rarly online references even print media have already token the information from Wikipedia. Well, I see I can't change your mind, restore it then to my userspace first, preferably with discussion page if there is one. What would I have to do to it get reviewed for movement back to article space then later? Testales (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Testales/Sarah Louise Young. Keep me posted, if you have improved the page sourcing and demonstrated WP:NOTE satisfaction. -- Cirt (talk) 18:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

re: Hassan

Your point regarding this matter being dredged up again is a good one. I support retaining the references, though I think the length of the entry is awkward. I've added a suggestion on the article talk page of a few things which might help with that concern, and also edited Hassan's entry on the list to illustrate my suggestion. I'm not wedded to it, and it is just an illustration, so revert it if it doesn't look useful. • Astynax ^talk 09:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree with that change, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 16:03, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

NSFW. A hunter shoots a bear! AfD

Cirt, Could you explain your close here? Sources, and I do mean a lot of sources, were found and commented on. It clearly meets our inclusion guidelines and the !votes from when the sources were found were at the least a NC, and I'd say a clear keep. The delete !votes above the sources were largely looking for sources and the ones below don't exactly have a lot in the way of guidelines/polices on their side as far as I can see. Hobit (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Most Hated Family in America

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Can I reblock 64.34.172.46 as an open proxy?

Hi Cirt. I just verified that 64.34.172.46 is an open proxy. I enabled it via port 8080 and used it to change my own IP address. Since open proxies tend to remain in service a long time, any objection if I reblock it for three years? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 18:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Could you investigate this for me?

Theuhohreo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) added a mass of speculative information here. When I reverted it not long ago he/she added the information back with crap sources here. Now the bit that rung alarm bells with me was I noticed you blocked him from editing on September 22, 2010 and then JamesBWatson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) declined the request several hours later. However Theuhohreo has been editing since. I have to questions:

1. How long was his block for?
2. Im suspicious because in this edit, 82.155.201.234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) added virtually the same information previously on September 25, 2010. I'm just wondering if the IP and the user are one in the same and that because Uhohreo was blocked he added the info from his ip account?

Could you shed some light on the situation? Cheerz. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 22:16, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest you report this, to WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Every Day Fiction

Hello

I am an administrator from EveryDayFiction.com we created a article Every Day Fiction about two years ago that was deleted by yourself for lack of relevance among other things. Since then we have collected about ~20 different news papers (Wall Street Journal, new yorker, wired, Vancouver sun, Provence, and TV shows (Click TV, G4, BBC) talking about our site, print and online. I would like to re-create the article.

We have also branched out starting three other magazines Every Day poets, Flash fiction chronicles, Every Night Erotica and acquired one magazine Ray Gun Revival (thats has had a wiki article for years) We are also about to launch our paid service Every Day Novels that will publish about 10-12 books a year. We currently have 4 published books (2 more coming out before the end of the year) with 2-3k circulation each of the published books.

We are currently running at 10k RSS/Email subscribers and anther 10k website visitors each day. Thats larger then a lot of print short fiction and flash fiction magazines.

If its a conflict of interest for me to write the article I can ask our readership to do it for us.

I re-read the deletion log http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Every_Day_Fiction and it appears that the biggest problem that we had was lack of relevancy that we now have with all out news paper articles.

Is there anything else that we are missing? Do you have any problem with me or one of my readers re-creating the Every Day Fiction article ? Funvill (talk) 23:04, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace page. If you wish it, I can make a version of the deleted page available for you. -- Cirt (talk) 03:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

No complaint about the closure, but...

Could you please userfy Squatters (TV series) to me at User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/Squatters (TV series)? It was never listed at the Film & Television delsort and I missed the discussion until it was mentioned elsewhere. I do not feel the nominator was as diligent as he might have been in his WP:BEFORE, as my own research after-the-fact shows suitable notability. If I can make it better then however it was, I will come back to you for an opinion as to whether the issues discussed at the AFd have been reasonably addressed. After which, I might seek your blessing for a return to mainspace or offer it to incubation for additional input. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done! :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Undelete "CYSJ" page

I do not know why the page on CYSJ (Canadian Young Scientist Journal) was deleted as being "not notable" if it is distributed to every single high school in Canada. As a Canadian, I personally find it offensive if something delivered to all the 4000 high schools in Canada are considered not notable enough to be on Wikipedia when I can find information about obscure musicians from the Dominican Republic (for which I am grateful, as they are very interesting.) In my opinion, notable is if someone else notable recognizes that object/person as notable. If you would head onto their site (cysjournal.ca) you would see they are backed not only by the NRC Research Press but also by Youth Sciences Canada. Along the guidelines of Wikipedia's ideal of "The Free Encyclopedia" comes more than just free but another term; "open." This in my opinion reflects being open to what is new; the Canadian Young Scientists Journal is quite new by the amount of issues but also new by its concept of publishing the research of high school students, something I have not seen before. In this, the journal gains notability of another level; the notability of being unique. I apologize for the long message but for these reasons I would like you to undelete the article for CYSJ. Mountjudo (talk) 23:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you can work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace page. If you wish it, I can make it available for you to work on, for such a purpose. -- Cirt (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

And I hope he does so... and that he keeps in mind that all he need do is source the assertion that the book is used in some 4000 high schools across Canada... making notability is a lock per Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria #4. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Best to do a bit of work on it in a userspace draft, first. :) -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I do agree. I looked at a copy of the article at wikibin and it reads like an advert. To pe properly encyclopedic, the re-write needs a decidely more neutral tone and requires sourcing to the professional academic organizations that speak toward its creation and use. In just a quick look, I found the journal received grants from the Canadian Space Agency for its creation,[14][15] and has been spoken of in depth for the benefit it offers secondary education in Canada.[16][17] and has become part of the sylabus for many schools across Canada.[18][19][20][21][22][23] My own thought is that to meet Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria #4, a book (specially a school book) need not also meet WP:GNG... but only be able to properly verify itself as meeting criteria #4... which this one seems to quite easily. If the author takes heed of advice, a shorter and decently encyclopedic and sourced article will be back. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Nod, your assessment is probably accurate. -- Cirt (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Warning

You put a warning on my talk page for my edits on Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski. If you had checked you would have seen that my edits were reverting vandalism by an IP user and not adding unsourced information. Vrenator (talk) 17:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

You should not have reverted. You should have checked more carefully. By reverting, you added unsourced info back into a BLP page. -- Cirt (talk) 17:57, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Are you seriously telling me that removing information such as, "Pogonowski is an obsessive anti-Semite who maintains that Jews wish to conquer the world and enslave the "Aryans." Such bizarre views recall Hitler and lead logically to the conclusion that Jews should be exterminated." was not checking carefully enough. The same IP then deleted content with no explanation. I did not ADD information but reverted edits so that it was back to the previous day's page.Vrenator (talk) 18:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

[24] = addition of unsourced info to BLP page. [25] = addition of unsourced info to BLP page (yes, remove the other stuff, but do not add back unsourced info to BLP page). -- Cirt (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Give a glance to this AFD please

Could you weigh in on this AFD? I am not really familiar with policies regarding non-English sources when it comes to verifiability and notability. There seems to be a weak consensus forming, but I think the input of a couple of experienced editors would be helpful. Thanks! The Eskimo (talk) 18:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I see someone has posted to WP:DELSORT. I would also suggest posting a matter-of-fact, neutrally-worded-notice, to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects. -- Cirt (talk) 18:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Featured Portal Reviews in the pipeline

Just a note that I've left warning messages at Portal talk:Politics and Portal talk:France (together with messages for their WikiProjects and designated portal maintainers) that featured portal reviews will be launched unless speedy improvements are made. (For what it's worth, I clicked on three portals in the featured portals category at random, and in the third one (Portal:Poetry) found some months-old vandalism... Is it worth roping a few people in to sweep through the list and see what is and isn't being maintained regularly or randomly updated?) Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 13:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

If you want to sweep, say, the WP:FPOCs, prior to 2007, that might be a good idea. As for the rest, thanks very much, and please keep me posted. :) -- Cirt (talk) 16:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Bencherlite/Portals check 2010 is underway. Bencherlite^Talk 12:58, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Ball Park Music

Hi Cirt. Just wondering about your closier of the afd for this band. Looking at the discussion, per nom and Not notable can be dismissed. "original speedy was correct" was shown to be wrong both by an assersion of notability in the article and a verification of that claim by a later editor (myself) with a link. Michig said "No album yet" (true, shows they do not satisfy wp:music#5 so is a good point for the discussion but does not in itself prevent notability) and "very little coverage found". After the later statement coverage was found. "very little or maybe no coverage anywhere" by DARTH SIDIOUS 2 was before further coverage was provided. I provided a link showing how they satisfied wp:music, answerering claims of non-notable, and provided more coverage in response to the belief of "very little coverage". My response to questions about about my keep !vote were not in any way adressed. The behaviuour of the (clearly coi) artilce creator is not that important in an afd. Putting aside bad !votes, addressed concerns and that this is not a !vote count I can't see how this was not a no concensus. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Your concerns were replied to at the AFD. I would suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could userfy it for you, if you wish. -- Cirt (talk) 16:29, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The Bridge (2006 Drama)

The diff for your edit makes it hard to see, but the article shows you un-blockquoted the article quote.
Per WP:MOSQUOTE#Block quotations, long quotes are usually blockquoted or otherwise distinguished from the straight prose. At 1024x768, the quote was more than "four lines." I didn't revert, because I'm interested in your take on it. I found that section difficult to paraphrase, so I didn't, because it goes to the film's notability, the director's notability, independent filmmakers, etc. --Lexein (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggest discussion about individual articles, talk place at the talk pages of those articles. :P -- Cirt (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Rescue Barnstar

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		You resuscitated Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia in the most spectacular fashion saving it from deletion and leaving Wikipedia with another great article. Cheers! Chesdovi (talk) 21:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 21:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Reply:The Editor's Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar Cirt. While I didn't expect it, that really made my day. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:08, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, you are most welcome. I am glad it made your day! -- Cirt (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamen Rider Blade: Missing Ace

You would probably have flipped my orange bar over this so I decided to message you first. I'm still having a hard time not thinking like a "non-admin" closer when it comes to close AFDs so this is my first "coin flipper". (though any admin who actually flips a coin when closing an AFD shouldn't be an admin). I know you wanted it deleted but try to be neutral and tell me what you think of my reading of the discussion? --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

No objections! :) Though I had a different opinion. Good close. No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 01:35, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

AfD Question

Shouldn't this have been relisted? I really don't think a Keep, a Delete, and a Provisional Delete vote can really be considered any sort of consensus. Silverseren^C 02:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done! Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! You're definitely one of the most easy-going admins i've seen that act as closer in AfDs. Most of the other admins would have argued. Silverseren^C 02:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

You are most welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

And replied at user's talk page. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Your name came up indirectly at ANI. Ignore or observe

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:40, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, [26] -- Cirt (talk) 02:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Silver seren‎

Maybe you could convince him that an RFA is good for him, as you are a supporter of his works as well. He'll make a perfect adminstrator, but I'm having trouble convincing him that it's worth it. Thanks Secret ^account 02:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

• This is all an admin conspiracy, you're all out to get me! D: Jeez...fine, fine...i'll try. But if it doesn't work, then i'm going to say "I told you so". So...how should I go about doing this? First things first, I need to go remove that userbox and edit my essay, so I don't seem like a hypocrite. ^_^; Silverseren^C 02:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Email enabled. Silverseren^C 03:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Did you get my reply? Silverseren^C 03:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok I'm doing the RFA as we speak. Secret ^account 03:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Just know that I have three tests this week (one each day), so i'm going to be kinda busy until this weekend. (And thanks!) Silverseren^C 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

West Midlands bus routes 1, 2 & 5 former page

Dear Cirt

Is there anychance you could reinsert the text on the page temporarily so i can Userfy the page to make improvements to it.

If you could do that so i can place to go to User:Dudleybus/Route Articles for improving/WM 1,2,5,former 351

User:Dudleybus User talk:Dudleybus 08:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 14:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

AFD: The Bridge (2006 drama) related question

Why do we not have a list of Media (Films, Books,Tv episodes Music, Video, Plays, Web Videos Etc) involving Scientology? Such a list would assist in Films like "The Bridge" and Web videos (Like the erie Project Chranology Video) that can't merit there own article but are definitely do merit mentioning but do not fit neatly in any other article. It seem logical collection to me? It seems if we have a RS specifically about them then it would merit inclusion it would be a manageable. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 16:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

There is an article, not a list, called Scientology in popular culture, but I have not had a chance to improve its sourcing, yet. -- Cirt (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Quidco article

Hi again Cirt, I have made some changes to the proposed Quidco article and have included notable secondary sources as per your recommendations about WP:NOTE, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:CIT. I hope the improvements are sufficient.

Stuartcoggins (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Link to the draft proposed page, please? -- Cirt (talk) 16:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, the link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stuartcoggins/Sandbox

Stuartcoggins (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The Secrets of Scientology

Hi, thanks for expanding the article. It's starting to really take shape now. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Busch Gardens Williamsburg

It looks like an editor you blocked for WP:COI is apparently still editing as the supposedly-blocked screen name. Apparently didn't understand the concept of COI, as evidenced here. --McDoobAU93 19:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Requesting second look

Hi, I'm here to request a second look at the MfD Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Access Denied/vandalbox. The vote ended up as a borderline no consensus (4 keep, 5 delete) and because there is an ongoing RfC regarding vandalspaces, I'd appreciate it if you could restore the vandalbox for now. Thanks in advance, Access Denied ^{[FATAL ERROR]} 04:24, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Nah, but please do keep me posted on the outcome of the RFC - where is the RFC linked at please? -- Cirt (talk) 04:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The RfC is at Wikipedia talk:User pages#Userspace Vandalism Sandboxes. Cunard (talk) 04:27, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 04:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but if consensus turns out to be that vandalspaces are acceptable, would you restore it? Access Denied ^{[FATAL ERROR]} 04:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Let's first actually see what the RFC says. -- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Deletion / Updated Alex Nackman article

September 28, 2010

Cirt,

As you have allowed me to do, I have updated the article entry for singer/songwriter/producer, Alex Nackman, which you voted for deletion a couple weeks ago. As I mentioned before, I have worked with Alex for 6 years now and I used to manage him. I can attest for his legitimacy and we have never tried to puff up his Wiki profile since we first wrote it back in 2005. We have only been factual and upfront about his albums, recorded work, and the television songwriting he has done.

I truly hope you will reconsider the deletion and re-instate the article on Wkipedia, now with many significant changes.

The link to the article is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Musicman5/Alex_Nackman

Best Regards, Musicman5 (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Mark

That proposed page has zero citations. Please read WP:CITE, WP:CIT, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:BLP, and WP:Article development. -- Cirt (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

September 28, 2010

Sorry Cirt. I've updated the references and removed anything that I couldn't find a reliable online source for. Please let me know if this is ok. Thank you for the reconsideration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Musicman5/Alex_Nackman

Musicman5 (talk) 00:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)Mark

There is only one citation now. Please check out some Featured Articles as examples, and also, some articles currently being debated at Featured Article Candidate discussions, for the level of referencing they have. -- Cirt (talk) 01:37, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

September 29, 2010

Cirt-

I've updated the references adding a number of sources. I hope we can re-instate this wiki article. Thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Musicman5/Alex_Nackman

Musicman5 (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)Mark

September 30, 2010 Hi Cirt,

I hope the references update I made is ok and that we can re-instate the Alex Nackman wiki page. Thanks very much.

Musicman5 (talk) 23:20, 30 September 2010 (UTC)Mark

Pulaski Skyway

Your choice to place a ban on editing is unclear as there is not edit war taking place on the article (article improvements w/ superior references or the preponderance of references which support the changes is not edit warring]]. Nonetheless, as there is a discussion regarding how to define the Pulaski Skyway in light of contradictory information and opinions your input would be appreciated in a survey. Djflem (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to keep me posted if WP:Dispute resolution processes lead to an amicable resolution among the involved parties, at the article's talk page. And/or request unprotection, at WP:RFPP, for another admin to review the conflict. -- Cirt (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Please remove protection at above as a conclusion has been reached as to handling disputed content regarding length. ThanksDjflem (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

West Midlands bus routes 1, 2 & 5 former page

Dear Cirt

Is there anychance you could reinsert the text on the page temporarily so i can Userfy the page to make improvements to it.

If you could do that so i can place to go to User:Dudleybus/Route Articles for improving/WM 1,2,5,former 351

User:Dudleybus User talk:Dudleybus 08:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 14:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

AFD: The Bridge (2006 drama) related question

Why do we not have a list of Media (Films, Books,Tv episodes Music, Video, Plays, Web Videos Etc) involving Scientology? Such a list would assist in Films like "The Bridge" and Web videos (Like the erie Project Chranology Video) that can't merit there own article but are definitely do merit mentioning but do not fit neatly in any other article. It seem logical collection to me? It seems if we have a RS specifically about them then it would merit inclusion it would be a manageable. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 16:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

There is an article, not a list, called Scientology in popular culture, but I have not had a chance to improve its sourcing, yet. -- Cirt (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Quidco article

Hi again Cirt, I have made some changes to the proposed Quidco article and have included notable secondary sources as per your recommendations about WP:NOTE, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:CIT. I hope the improvements are sufficient.

Stuartcoggins (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Link to the draft proposed page, please? -- Cirt (talk) 16:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, the link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stuartcoggins/Sandbox

Stuartcoggins (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The Secrets of Scientology

Hi, thanks for expanding the article. It's starting to really take shape now. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Busch Gardens Williamsburg

It looks like an editor you blocked for WP:COI is apparently still editing as the supposedly-blocked screen name. Apparently didn't understand the concept of COI, as evidenced here. --McDoobAU93 19:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Requesting second look

Hi, I'm here to request a second look at the MfD Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Access Denied/vandalbox. The vote ended up as a borderline no consensus (4 keep, 5 delete) and because there is an ongoing RfC regarding vandalspaces, I'd appreciate it if you could restore the vandalbox for now. Thanks in advance, Access Denied ^{[FATAL ERROR]} 04:24, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Nah, but please do keep me posted on the outcome of the RFC - where is the RFC linked at please? -- Cirt (talk) 04:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The RfC is at Wikipedia talk:User pages#Userspace Vandalism Sandboxes. Cunard (talk) 04:27, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 04:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but if consensus turns out to be that vandalspaces are acceptable, would you restore it? Access Denied ^{[FATAL ERROR]} 04:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Let's first actually see what the RFC says. -- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Mau Piailug

Hi, Cirt, I thought I would leave a friendly reminder about Mau Piailug which is on hold. Do you have recommendations for the next steps?  –Newportm (talk • contribs) 05:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Will take another look soon. -- Cirt (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for filling in

Thanks for the adding the ANI notifications to the involved editors talk pages. I missed that step. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 06:23, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Kevin Kadish

I am Kevin Kadish, a songwriter and producer who has sold over 11 million records as certified by the RIAA and has contributed many recognizable songs to pop culture. I have written or produced records for the likes of Miley Cyrus, Jason Mraz, Willie Nelson, Sheryl Crow, Rob Thomas, Nikki Sixx, Meatloaf, Taylor Hicks, Gloriana, Stacie Orrico, Joe Jonas, Coldwater Jane, Bif Naked, Skillet, etc...

I wrote, produced, and engineered, Jason Mraz "Wordplay" and "Geek In The Pink" for which i was nominated for a grammy for Best Engineered record. My two songs were the ONLY radio singles on Mr. A-Z. I received an ASCAP Award for Stacie Orrico "(There's Gotta Be) More To Life" (it was one of the most played songs on radio in 2005). In 2006, I also received an #1 award from SoCan (Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada) for writing the #1 song "Flawed Design" by Stabilo.

Please verify my notability with www.allmusic.com and reconsider "undeleting" my profile on wikipedia.

thanks again...

---

Kevin Kadish —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slowguy (talk • contribs) 06:24, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggest working on a draft proposed version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 16:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

User talk:BGWeditKF

You are right, I should have let you know as a courtesy that I was considering unblocking. I tend to think that with a {{Uw-ublock}} notice saying "Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username", a request for unblocking to change username should be accepted unless there are strong reasons not to, even if I have doubts, unlike in the case of a {{spamusernameblock}}, where I am much more willing to say "no". I suppose what it amounts to is that if the blocking admin has said that the user name is the only reason for the block, I accept that judgement. However, that does not alter the fact that I could have let you know, and in similar situations in future I shall try to make sure I do. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:27, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 16:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Body memory

• Body memory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

After some discussion it has become clear that my request for protection was a bit premature and basted on a mistaken assumption. I apologize. I am requesting that it be removed.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 13:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

You can request unprot at WP:RFPP. -- Cirt (talk) 16:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

tyop

Hello. As I appear to have inserted an error in the article targeted killing, which you have page protected, I wonder if I might ask you to correct it for me (as I am unable? I've left word describing it here. Thank you. Epeefleche.

Looks like this has been done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Play Fighting

I noticed you deleted the play fighting page, when this is a naturally healthy human emotional response to stress. This is why men are depressed now a days, because they cannot feel any good feelings of eustress. Women are dying to find a man, so please re upload this page and respect its credibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Impact41 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you can create a subpage within your userspace, to work on a proposed draft version. -- Cirt (talk) 16:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Business and economics

Can you close the review now? Its October and there's still no movement. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:49, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Probably will do it within a week or so. -- Cirt (talk) 16:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 21:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Gene Price

I have added to and referenced the page, and now hope that it will be subject to improvement by others. I have left the refimprove tag, but removed the unsourced tag, which I hope seems reasonable. I am hopeful that someone who has completely read the 2010 Buck Owens biography will be able to add more about his relationship to Gene Price. I took what I found from an internet book extract.

Dreadarthur (talk) 15:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks a little bit better. -- Cirt (talk) 16:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Sima Yari Page

Dear Cirt:

I Contributed a biography type of page on Ms. Sima Yari, a prominent Iranian poem about two years ago. I have updated and maintained the page since its creation. I recently learned that she has nominated by a few organizations and scholars for 2010 Nobel prize in Literature and went to edit the page with this new information and noticed that the page was deleted. I respectfully request the page to be restored. Thank you. Nematg (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)nematg

Confirmation of this claim? -- Cirt (talk) 17:00, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Here is one the e-mails sent to nomination committee:

Dear members of the Award Committee, This letter is to endorse the nomination of Ms Sima Yari, the distinguished Iranian poet, for 2010-2011 Nobel Prize in literature. Ms Yari is an accomplished Iranian poet with many publications. Her poetry is a testimony to the perseverance of human spirit under the most unfavorable circumstances. It is the voice of a courageous poet who, despite the male dominated nature of the society in which she lives, refuses to be silenced. Ms Yari belongs to the rich tradition of Iranian feminine poetry whose other prominent participants are Parvin Etessami and Forough Farokhzad. Even though, her poems are connected to and reflect the life-world of the contemporary Iranian society, they convey a kind of universal femininity to which anyone can relate, regardless of cultural and gender differences. It is my pleasure to endorse her nomination for 2010-2011 Nobel Prize in literature.

Shahrokh Haghighi. Ph. D Philosophy Department Cal. State University Long Beach Email: shaghig2@csulb.edu

Thank you. Nematg (talk) 21:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)nematg

That is a violation of WP:NOR. Please read WP:RS. -- Cirt (talk) 22:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out. I can not comply with this until the names released and published by the nomination committee. However, this is rather to challenge the idea of deleting the page and supporting my request to restoring the page. Thank you gain. Nematg (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC) Nematg

Sorry but that is not the best way to satisfy WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 01:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cirt:

I sincerely appreciate the time you are spending on this subject. However please note the Poet in question (Sima Yari) is living in Iran and mainly writes in Farsi and for this mere fact there are not many sources in English to provide as reference for her. On the other hand she is among very very few feminine poets who still dares to write against all obstacles in her way. This by itself worth mentioning and allow the world hear about her and enjoy her poems. My strongest reference to add here is Britannica book of year 2006 providing the following: "Kilid (“The Key”) by Sima Yari was the most successful example of a poetry book by a woman. Like many other recent publications, this slim volume was accompanied by a compact disc with the author reading the text." This is my final appeal to request restoring the page against all shortcomings of the text. I close this topic hoping you consider this appeal favorably and restoring the page. Allow me to commend all of you and wish you success on the job well done. I remain as a strong supporter of Wikipedia the only free source of information. I wish to thank you again. Nematg (talk) 01:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could make such a version available for you, if you wish it. -- Cirt (talk) 02:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I truly appreciate that. How can access and proceed? Thank you. Nematg (talk) 02:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Nematg/Sima Yari. -- Cirt (talk) 03:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Cybercrime

This new article on Wikipedia is a fake. The named reference "The Telegraph" used by the author is a faked site , a (1:1) mirrow of the original The Telegraph UK( Britain Newspaper). It make it look like the Britain Newspaper has published this and it is missused by stalkers to give evidence of the content. For the faked mirrow they registered in September the domain thetelegraph.us. Also they registered a new domain 9stardubai.com. Before they used 9starsdubai.com and dubai9stars.blogspot.com. On both domains ( dubai9stars.blogspot.com and 9starsdubai.com) they already mirowed dubai7stars.com and 7starsdubai.com. The new false stalking message is also posted by them now since the last 10 days on doxtop.com and by opening severyl faked account on Twitter, Facebook and other platforms.

The same person(s) started already in July August 2010 on Wikipedia a campaign by establish the Wikipedia Site Al Fajer Group. You already identifyed in August that the user Dubaiguy1)who started this page used several usernames ( sock puppet), after Articles on this site and other sites about Shahram Zadeh has been deleted by Wikipedia.

Please take a very deep look ( especcially on the faked reference The Telegraph ( www.thetelegraph.us), the faked website of the original of the The Telegraph UK.

Dont let Wikipedia to be misused for such a cybercrime! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Equinox555 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

That is not at Wikipedia, it is located at Wikinews. -- Cirt (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Update, see: [27]. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Breakaway (Transformers)

Can you please recreate the article Breakaway (Transformers) to my user space for me to work on? Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Mathewignash/Breakaway (Transformers). -- Cirt (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Mathewignash (talk) 17:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:33, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

unprotect targeted killing

I have requested unprotection on the article's talk page. I believe the redirect issue has been resolved in favor of 2 separate articles, and there are other issues we need to get on with. Thundermaker (talk) 21:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Will respond there. -- Cirt (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

80% rise in the number of portals...

Just in case you suddenly wonder how {{Number of portals}} went from 588 portals to 1051, see User:Zetawoof/PortalList and User:Bencherlite/Portals check 2010/count. I thought that previous figure was far too low! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 12:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 12:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Erich Albrecht - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erich Albrecht

Dear Cirt,

could I have a copy of Erich Albrecht "userfied" please as I would like to do the article again when and if I get the referenece to the "German" biography of him by Prof Winder McConnell. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 08:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC))

 Done, now at User:Msrasnw/Erich Albrecht. -- Cirt (talk) 16:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks. I will let you know before and if I relaunch the article. This is I think only likely if Prof McConnell provides a ref for his bibliography of him. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC))

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cirt,

Hi I now have the McConnel biography which was published in the Internationales Germanistenlexikon. This seems to be a big book of biographical details of noted scholars of the German Language! Is this enough? It is quite long and detailed but doesn't deal with his war record - Enough anyway to relaunch the article and see if it would be acceptable. I have just added the one line in here User:Msrasnw/Erich_Albrecht but there is more could be added if I can improve my German sufficiently. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Does not yet seem enough improvements to counter the delete arguments from the AFD, or to satisfy WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 14:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

So quick - I was just going to add - this ref is a main - sole source used in Oskar Schade,Adolf Jellinek and J. P. Stern . Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 14:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Would adding any/all of these help:

* 1956 Keys to the City of New Orleans

* 1946 special advisory to the Secretary of War

* 1960 Member of the Board of Directors of the Family Service Society

* 1965-1978 the J. Anthony Burzle Professor of German Language and Literature (Univ of Kansas) - does this alone pass our WP:Prof test - a named chair?

* 1957 Colonel on the staff of Gov. Earl K Long

Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 15:41, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Feel free to improve and work on the draft version further, but please do not use my user talk page as a forum to rehash the AFD again. -- Cirt (talk) 15:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry for having bothered you here. I had thought I had to somehow address the deleting administrator about such things and feel I was adding new information not rehashing the Afd. I will add these things to the article and restore the article to the main space given that it is now clear, to me, that he passes WP:Prof.. Sorry again to have bothered you. (Msrasnw (talk) 15:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Please do not move it to main article space. -- Cirt (talk) 15:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought that since there was now clear evidence that he passes WP:prof 5 named chair then putting it back would be OK with you. I will await your suggestions before any action. Msrasnw (talk) 15:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Feel free to improve and work on the draft version further. -- Cirt (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what you want adding or where I should ask about this as it already seems to me pass! (Msrasnw (talk) 16:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Not really significant improvements, does not really address or satisfy significant coverage from multiple independent secondary reliable sources. -- Cirt (talk) 16:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cirt, my understanding is that there is sufficient evidence of multiple independent relaiable sources in the article and that he passes WP:Prof 5 via his named chair and U of Kansas being major institution of higher education and research and that WP:prof asserts that if an academic is notable under this guideline, his or her possible failure to meet other subject specific notability guidelines is irrelevant. I feel we have sufficent sources and am not sure of the problem. Clearly we are in disagreement about interpetations of policy. What is the procedure in such cases of a disagreement? Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 16:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

You are refusing to attempt to further improve the quality of the page on this person, while it is in your userspace subpage? -- Cirt (talk) 16:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry to have annoyed you about this but I think you have not been not fair and have been rude. I added the reference to the new source and asked about which information could/should be added and added the details about the named chair and had asked you as the deleting administor for help. I am sorry to have annoyed you about this. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 16:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

Please see my response, below. -- Cirt (talk) 16:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, back in main article space. Back at AFD for fresh input from community, now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erich Albrecht (2nd nomination). Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Lilias Rider Haggard article - revisited

I have recently added more information and references to User:Jcspurrell/Lilias Rider Haggard. Please tell me if I can go ahead and recreate the article or whether I need an administrator's permission first. Thank you. Jcspurrell (talk) 23:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Some of the claims appear uncited. Please format the cites using WP:CIT, and the page WP:CITE will help with that. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I have now provided references for the previously uncited sentences. Jcspurrell (talk) 21:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see prior response, above, about formatting cites. -- Cirt (talk) 21:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I think I've formatted the references correctly now. Jcspurrell (talk) 21:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Does not appear so. -- Cirt (talk) 21:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see what you mean. Would you be able to correct it for me or explain exactly what I need to do? The instructions for formatting references are quite confusing. Thank you very much. Jcspurrell (talk) 21:39, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

1. Copy the appropriate template from WP:CIT.
2. Fill in as many of the fields as possible, especially: author, date, work, publisher, page number.
3. Follow WP:CITE for in-line cites, for referencing use with <ref></ref>

-- Cirt (talk) 22:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I think we may be talking about different things. On page WP:CIT I have been following the instruction under "Using the same footnote multiple times" but I end up with an error message all the time. The reference in question is a website and therefore does not have a page number, publisher, etc. Do you have any advice? Jcspurrell (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

The publisher is the website. There should still be a date to input, an accessdate, and an author. -- Cirt (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I searched the website more thoroughly to find the book from which the information was taken. I think everything should be in order now. Thanks for all your help. Jcspurrell (talk) 12:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Three cites are still not formatted properly. "Idem" is inappropriate, please use "refname" formatting, see WP:REFNAME. -- Cirt (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I tried to do that several times yesterday, but I always got an error message. I followed the instructions as best I could, but they are quite confusing. Would it be possible for you to make the correction when you have a spare few minutes? Thank you very much. Jcspurrell (talk) 13:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have done that. -- Cirt (talk) 13:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much! May I go ahead and recreate the article now or should an administrator do that? Jcspurrell (talk) 13:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

No. One source is okay, the other is not properly formatted, as I have stated repeatedly. And you have failed to demonstrate significant coverage in multiple secondary sources independent of the subject, per WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 13:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, the second source is now formatted correctly (sorry, I didn't realise there was a problem with this one - I thought the problem was how to repeat the first source). As for "significant coverage", it is true that not many internet sources mention Lilias Rider Haggard, but this is precisely why I think a Wikipedia article is important, so that those who are curious about her (as I was several weeks ago, when I decided to write my article) can learn a little about her life. She was not a first-rate author, but her biography of her father is helpful for anyone interested in H. Rider Haggard, and her works on life in the countryside are important for understanding how things were back then. The fact that some people have posted photographs of her grave on the internet shows notability, and I know from correspondence with the Rider Haggard Society that a biography of Lilias Rider Haggard is currently being written. When this book is published, I am sure that many potential readers will turn to Wikipedia to see if they can learn anything about the lady before buying her biography. This is why I feel that my short article is required. Furthermore, as time goes by, people will surely add to the article. Thank you for your understanding. Jcspurrell (talk) 13:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but the AFD consensus was clear, and you have failed to show secondary source coverage that demonstrates otherwise. -- Cirt (talk) 13:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll let you know if I find any other sources that I think may help satisfy Wikipedia's requirements. Jcspurrell (talk) 14:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

AN?

Why is the proposal suddenly being moved to AN? I didn't see anything wrong with WTDYK; this just makes a mess by spreading it across more pages.

If it must be at AN (although I still don't see why) can you at least copy over the !votes and discussion that were already made at WTDYK? rʨanaɢ (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather not copy over discussion, as most of that discussion was about whether to have it at AN. Now that it is at AN, discussion about whether to have it at AN is repetitive to discussion already taking place on the AN page. You see, it will make things much simpler. -- Cirt (talk) 15:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

No, there was a big discussion under DS's !vote about the proposal itself, not about AN, and there was another editor who !voted (two, if you count mine that editconflicted). And I didn't see anyone other than Courcelles asking for the discussion to be moved anyway. I'm not asking for the whole discussion to be posted over, but can you at least copy over the relevant part (everything other than the discussion under Courcelles' vote is not about AN). rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

 Doing.... -- Cirt (talk) 15:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, from a read of that discussion, I am certain editors that commented there are aware of the shift to WP:AN, and are intelligent enough to figure things out, and comment there. I would rather a fresh thread take place at AN, and oppose cut/pasting comments from one to the other (the only case where I did that, was for my own prior comments.) So I thought that was okay. :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Pay attention.

"Nothing seems to be wrong with that hook" ?

Please consult 'the discussion which I posted. The hook is phrased such that it is factually inaccurate. I have opened a discussion on the topic, and posted a request to the talkpage of the user who created the article.

I will accept that you did not realize the error, and as such that you did not intend this as a violation of WP:POINT. I profoundly and sincerely apologize for my earlier statement on that matter.

So as to avoid a wheel war, I politely request that you remove that hook yourself. DS (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect assessment. I read the article. Your analysis was faulty. -- Cirt (talk) 15:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment by Gatoclass (talk · contribs), [28]. -- Cirt (talk) 15:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

For the record, I ask that you make a null edit to that queue addressing the error, so as to more clearly indicate that a valid concern (factual accuracy) has been addressed and ruled unnecessary. Simply saying "nothing is in error" can (and in my case, did) give the misleading impression that you had failed to notice the issue being addressed. I hope you realize that this whole mess is the result of multiple types of problems (is it all right to remove a hook if it's 'inappropriate' (note scare-quotes), vs is it all right to remove a hook if there's questions over its accuracy, vs is it all right to reword a hook for elegance and flow) being conflated. And as always, note that people may not choose their words optimally if they are in a hurry to respond to seemingly-aggressive questions while they are to avoid edit conflicts. DS (talk) 15:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. Unnecessary. That seems overly much and parsing into edit summaries. -- Cirt (talk) 15:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

DS, there is only one type of problem: whether or not you exercise good judgment in deciding what hooks are ok to remove. The consensus from the most recent discussion appears to be that you do not, regardless of what your reason for removing it is. If other users in the project think that you can't decide what hooks are ok (regardless of whether you make your decision based on (in)appropriateness, (in)accuracy, or any other criterion), then you shouldn't be doing it. rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Errors

When there are edit conflicts ongoing in a fervent debate, I would think it is obvious that editors may accidentally remove each other's comments. That said, I would feel much obliged if you would restore the comment of mine which you just removed on the grounds that I accidentally removed Gatoclass's comment. DS (talk) 17:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, feel free to add back your comment. -- Cirt (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

NYC Transparency Site is Running Again...

Hi Cirt. It seems that the NYC Transparency site has been released again at www.nyc.gov/transparency. Perhaps the article should be reverted from deletion? October 5 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.152.166.182 (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you could register an account on Wikipedia. Then, you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 05:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Sabbatic Witchcraft

Sabbatic Witchcraft is unanimously non-notable and the "article" is less than a stub. There's no reason to relist it. I've been waiting all week to change it into a redirect to Contemporary witchcraft#Sabbatic Current, but I've gone ahead and created a Sabbatic witchcraft redirect for the duration.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to notify me of developments post the relist, and then I may close it. :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought relisting meant it needed to go for another full week. Unfortunately, no one new chimed in and it was abused: WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Sabbatic dis-information. Par for the course, as I feared. But even if it can't be removed/stricken, at least I tried.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

No objections to the closure of the AFD. :) -- Cirt (talk) 20:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mergers and acquisitions by Condé Nast (3rd nomination)

Your action of relisting this was improper as you were the nominator and so are involved. I would have simply reverted but am not sure how to unpick the relisting process. The whole thing is a big waste of time as there is not the slightest consensus for deletion. Colonel Warden (talk) 01:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

It was a procedural nom, I had no opinion expressed in the AFD itself. -- Cirt (talk) 05:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Your action still seems disruptive and improper. I further note that you relisted another AFD when further discussion seems unnecessary. You actioned 10 other discussions during the same minute so you're only giving them about 5 seconds each. This does not seem sufficient time to properly digest what has been said. In this case it seems clear that there is no consensus to delete and, given the peculiar nature of this AFD, it would have been better to have closed it. Please clarify how you are handling such cases as it does not seem right that you should be handling AFDs with a bot or some simple algorithm/script. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I go over them in the days prior to closing them. -- Cirt (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• But then what of any amendments made after your review. And how do you record your findings? I'm just not understanding the process. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mergers and acquisitions by Condé Nast (3rd nomination) has been closed. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey Cirt, I have an issue with you relisting the House Episode pages for AFD again, this would mark the 3rd consecutive time they are going through AFD, relisted twice. Its not as if they did not get any response, the community consensus from the page is overwhelmingly in support of keeping them hence AFD process should be closed already. Please don't drag this out, are you expecting some different outcome? Theo10011 (talk) 16:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for closing it.Theo10011 (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Closed the AFD. And you are most welcome. Thank you for thanking me. That is really appreciated. A lot. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Mama grizzly

I'm a little puzzled about the conclusion of Mama grizzly deletion. At best, I could see a no consensus. I think the arguments made that the article fails WP:N and WP:NEO are easily refuted by the fact that the term is covered by the dozen or so secondary references which were listed in the article. The nominating editor claimed that the article read like a List of candidates endorsed by Sarah Palin but the fact is there was much more to the article than just that. There was the history of how the term was introduced by Sarah Palin, there was a section on how her opponents used the term against her, and also a section on how others used the term in a tongue and cheek for other purposes.
I am the main editor of the article (responsible for all by 2-3 minor edits), and missed the discussion because I did not pay attention to that article in the last week. Would you consider re-opening the discussion to allow me to add my voice to the discussion? Victor Victoria (talk) 11:24, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. Victor Victoria (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Wait, what? An article creator or primary contributor doesn't have some sort of special status in regards to AfDs; if they miss it, tough cookies, go to DRV if they really need to. Tarc (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The first step before going to DVR is to make a request with the closing admin, which is what I've done. Victor Victoria (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

LOL, they argue with me if it is closed, they argue with me if it is relisted, (see above), seems like Catch 22. This one is staying open and relisted. Worst case, the community of Wikipedia has a little additional time to voice their comments and view points in an open discussion. Tough cookies indeed. -- Cirt (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't trying to harp on ya, though it probably come across that way. I was just struck by the seeming "I didn't get a chance to save my article" nature of the request. Guess we'll see how it winds up in 7 days. :) Tarc (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Appreciated. Thank you. We will indeed. -- Cirt (talk) 16:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Publication Studio’s

Good Day to you Cirt. You recently closed an AFD, Publication Studio’s, as delete. Could you place a copy of the article on my subpage? I would like to take the essential information from the article and merge it into Matthew Stadler piece. Thanks for your help. ShoesssS ^Talk 12:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Shoessss/Publication Studio. -- Cirt (talk) 16:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick responce. ShoesssS ^Talk 17:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

You are most welcome. Thank you for taking the time to come here to my user talk page and thank me for doing that. It is most appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan Doria Pamphilj

Fine if you want to endorse the deletion, but it would only be fair if you argued the case. As it is you've just closed the discussion. I don't think anyone has responded to my arguments. Contaldo80 (talk) 14:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Consensus was determined to be in favor of endorse. -- Cirt (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Russia portal

Hi

I was going to post this on the Russia portal but then noticed that there doesnt seem to be much activity there ?

Can you have a loook if you get time please ? [29] - it is a series of edits by Joodoe whose english is not very good. I do not have enough knowledge of the goings on either so am asking you to help by either taking a look at it yourself or, if you can, pass it on to someone who may have more specific knowledge of these matters. There are some pretty big deletions of text etc (as well as some dubious looking additions)

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 18:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The portal is for discussion of the portal itself. Suggest you post to WT:RUSSIA. -- Cirt (talk) 19:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Assassination#RFC

I have refactored your refactoring of my initiation of talk:Assassination#RFC: Should there be a separate article called Targeted killing. I do not think that comments should be placed in separate sections. I also think that your replacement of the initial statement was too terse so I have put back my initial statement. Further having bothered to edit the section you do not seem to have expressed an opinion and the whole point of an RFC is to request comments! -- PBS (talk) 05:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

This undo of RFC formatting was more disruption, directly after these edits at Targeted killing:

• [30]
• [31]
• [32]

and these edits at Talk:Targeted killing:

• [33]
• [34]
• [35]

Please do not engage in such disruption in the future. -- Cirt (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: Disturbing comments regarding willingess to engage in disruption immediately after page protection expires = [36] -- Cirt (talk) 01:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

To redactor an editors comments and then when they are reverted to call that disruptive is an interesting interpretation of disruption when WP:REFACTOR says "If another editor objects to refactoring then the changes should be reverted." (I should know I wrote it several years ago) Before you started to refactor the talk page why did you not ask the involved partialities if they would object to refactoring it? Please do not reply here but on my talk page as I do not watch you talk page.

You made two edits to Trapped in the Closet (South Park) you changed 12th to twelfth and when it was reverted you reverted the revert. Was that disruptive editing? I suspect that you will answer no. But how many reverts is disruptive? Let us suppose that 88.117.86.175 had reverted again what would you have done. Perhaps you would have done the same as me and discussed it on 88.117.86.175 talk page and if you still could not agree have opened up an RFC?

BTW I am disappointed that you are not willing to engage in the RFC and express an opinion on the issue that is being debated as it is getting lots of people to engage in discussion that usually brings about the best results. -- PBS (talk) 12:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Further disruptive behavior as continuing from the pattern of the diffs, above, may result in a block in the future. I have taken admin related actions on those pages (full protection) and so I am staying out of the content issues and remaining uninvolved from a content capacity. -- Cirt (talk) 13:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Why deletion of Voluntary Content Rating

You deleted the article Voluntary_Content_Rating based on one vote (which incorrectly stated spam, because spam is only valid when there is no relevant content) and the request as non-notable.

The Article was very useful, though, because it lists the only simple alternative to the ICRA labels (Internet_Content_Rating_Association). ICRA labels impose restrictions on the content which are incompatible with free content¹, and PIC is quite complicated, so VCR is the only useful alternative for small website owners. And ICRA is dead… → http://icra.org

¹: http://draketo.de/licht/ich/meine-seite-ist-ab-18#fn:VCR (german)

So it was not non-notable and spam was assessed incorrectly (at least for the version I read a few years ago). And there was just one vote to kill an article which had useful content and had been around for at least one and a half years².

²: 1,5 years, because that was when I linked to it on http://draketo.de/schatten

Please undo the deletion. The content is very useful to webmasters, especially in germany where we now have to mark all pages.Draketo (talk) 12:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you can work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. If you like, I could make such a version available to you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 13:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review request: Sarah Louise Young

Hello Cirt,

I'm new to Wikipedia so please forgive any mistakes. I first directed this query to another user who it turned out was not able to review a deletion, and advised I should find an administrator. As far as I can work out you're the administrator who effected the deletion I'm interested in, so I'm writing to you.

A couple of days ago I did a search for a pornographic movie performer called Sarah Louise Young. I'm not a particular fan, but Ms Young's performances played a significant part in my youth and I wondered if she was in Wikipedia. I had a vague memory that I'd checked a few years ago and found she was, but I wasn't certain.

Anyway, what I found was a page indicating that she used to be in Wikipedia but the entry had been deleted. When I read closely and followed various links I found the reason was that she failed the 'notability criteria'. I was surprised because, my own memories aside, I knew she'd been a big deal in European pornography for several years. I checked the criteria and found that a pornographic actor or model is notable only if he or she:

1. Has won a well-known award such as an AVN Award. (See Category:Pornographic film awards or Category:Film awards for other awards which may apply.)

There were other numbered criteria, but this is the one I'm addressing.

I was pretty sure Sarah Louise Young had won several awards. I did a Google search of her name with the word 'award' and one of the early hits was the French Wikipedia entry for her name, which included the following awards:

• 1993: Best Actress – Festival International de Cine Erotico de Barcelona (FICEB), 1993, 1994, 1995.

• 1994: Best European Actress – Premio de Turia (Spanish Cultural Prize) sponsored by Turia and Generalitat de Valencia, 1994.

• 1995: Premio Alla Carriera – Il Festival Internazionale Dell 'Hard (Impulse D'Oro Awards), Bologna, 1995.

• 1996: Best Actress (German) – for the film Hamlet – The Brussels International Festival of Eroticism, 1996.

• 1997: Best European Actress – Venus Awards, Berlin, 1997.

These are from http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Louise_Young

At least a few of these are listed among the recognised awards as per the criteria, so could you please review the deletion?

Fergus Velour (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could make such a version available to you, if you so desire. -- Cirt (talk) 19:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

As above, I'm new here - and unfamiliar with the processes. Can a deletion not be reversed in light of new information? No matter, although I don't know how a subpage of my userspace would work or how I initiate such. I would appreciate it if you provide a draft version and any further instructions, or instructions on where I can find instructions :) Fergus Velour (talk) 20:17, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, it was already userfied to a draft version for another user, perhaps you can assist them with their draft improvements, at User:Testales/Sarah Louise Young. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I added the awards section as at French Wiki, although I couldn't find out how to actually contact that user. I expect they'll contact me if necessary. Thanks again for your help. Fergus Velour (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Chris

chris carter was killed on the columbine school grounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karakoo (talk • contribs) 19:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

What is this in regards to? -- Cirt (talk) 19:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Weaponbb7

Can you make sure to notify the involved parties please? Thanks! Tiptoety ^talk 20:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. However, please note that Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations#Evidence_and_SPI_case_guidelines states: "Notification is not mandatory, and may, in some instances, lead to further disruption or provide a sockpuppeteer with guidance on how to avoid detection." Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I am aware. There is a reason I asked though. ;-) Tiptoety ^talk 00:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cirt. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Okay thanks. :) -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Revert on ANI

Thanks for catching that accidental section-blanking on ANI. I'm not sure what happened there; I got an edit conflict and copied my text from the bottom to top box, as usual, but for some reason your added section wasn't shown there. A glitch in the way edit conflict merging works? --ais523 21:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 22:15, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Your quick action

Cirt, did you see the talk page for the Bouillon article you just deleted? Is there more to it? Drmies (talk) 04:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it. Nope, not really much else to it. -- Cirt (talk) 04:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 04:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 04:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Page protection: Monty Hall problem

You recently temporarily protected the Monty Hall problem article. As you likely know, the article is under mediation right now. Based on this statement, there does not seem to be adequate consensus to avoid revert-waring right now. Would you be willing to make the block indefinite for now? If a consensus emerges on editing we can remove the pp. Thanks. Sunray (talk) 21:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Let us revisit it after the protection expires. -- Cirt (talk) 17:00, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I may not be back online before the protection expires. Further background: I am mediating an ongoing dispute with the article.[37] The mediation is progressing slowly. However, as the above diff makes clear, at least one participant has resolved to make changes to the article as soon as the pp has been removed. Other participants have made it clear that they will revert any changes. We are not yet at a point where collaborative editing is likely to ensue. Continuing protection would be a good idea, IMO. Sunray (talk) 21:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, well hopefully things will get better between the parties, if not, can always reprotect for longer after that. -- Cirt (talk) 00:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I am hopeful that things will get better between the parties as a result of the mediation. However, the conditions are not yet such that they can agree on much. If you look at the article, you will see what I mean. I would suggest at least a 30 day protection of the article. Or we could protect it indefinitely pending consensus on editing rules. Sunray (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Monty Hall problem now fullprot for one month. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Quidco article

Hi Cirt, in case you missed my last update, the updated version of the proposed Quidco article is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stuartcoggins/Sandbox with improvements to the secondary references. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartcoggins (talk • contribs) .

Okay, will take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 10:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Please, format the cites with WP:CIT templates. -- Cirt (talk) 10:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, that is now complete. Stuartcoggins (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

One cite is still not formatted. -- Cirt (talk) 16:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that; the last one has now been formatted. Stuartcoggins (talk) 13:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, seems to still fail WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 13:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, would it be better to remove that reference entirely and have it stand uncited? Unfortunately that particular piece of information is not listed on any independent websites. Stuartcoggins (talk) 13:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

No, I mean the article as a whole fails WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah I see. I believe there was some good discussion about the notability of Quidco on the Articles for deletion/Quidco page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quidco, which argued in favour of keeping the article due to UK national media coverage of Quidco over the past few years. I would argue that the coverage of Quidco in national newspapers such as the Guardian, the Observer, the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail would constitute notability and satisfy the 'significant coverage' that is 'reliable' and 'independent of the subject' requirements of Wikipedia:NOTE. Thank you again for your time in looking at this. Stuartcoggins (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Moved into article mainspace. Sent to AFD for community assessment of notability of this latest incarnation. Now at AFD, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quidco (3rd nomination). -- Cirt (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for the time you've spent on this. Stuartcoggins (talk) 09:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 11:07, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Marvel Database Project

Hey, I've been away and didn't notice the deletion discussion going on for Marvel Database Project. I wanted to continue the discussion about it on the talk page and you're the administrator who deleted it, so if I understood the deletion review process correctly I'm supposed to contact you to talk about it.

MrBlonde267 (talk) 08:08, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. If you wish it, I can make such a copy available to you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:DRV

When the daily log for DRV is closed, the headers should be removed by hand for archiving per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Administrator instructions. Just a little reminder for when you have closed all of a day's DRVs. Thank you for your hard work in keeping DRV from getting backlogged. Best, Cunard (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Protection of the Jay Park Page

Hi Cirt! Thank you for semi-protecting the Jay Park page until November. It has been constantly plagued by vandalisms & unreferenced additions, so a protection of sorts is a welcome relief. There is this user,Jksun2 who kept adding specificity to the opening paragraph on the page. I explained on my last edit that keeping the introductory information general is more proper & specific details can be stated on the succeeding paragraphs (ref: Wikipedia:MOSBIO Opening Paragraph 3.3), but the user disregarded it. I checked on the user's talk page & it has received warnings to be blocked from editing due to disruptive editing, the last one was this October. Please advice on what can be done. The page can definitely improve w/ more cleaning up, but it won't progress if there are constant interruptions. Thank you so much. Kookygoddess (talk) 10:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Secrets of Scientology

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Why? was it deleted?

Why was my page User:Salamaat deleted? And If I want to recreate it with different content than what?Salamaat (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Salamaat. -- Cirt (talk) 20:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Need comment

I found a strange edit you made to the Battlefield Earth (film) article and made a comment about it in the talk page if you could please take the time to respond. Thanks. LuftWaffle0 (talk) 21:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Stanley Pons

Please discuss issues on the talk page instead of reverting back and forth repeatedly. -- Cirt (talk) 21:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Content is excessive , I removed it once and it was replaced with the comment , replacing long term stabler version .. there is no such thing and the criticism is excessive. If anyone actually opens a discussion I will join in but I will remove such content on sight, thanks. Your protecting the article is undue and not needed at all, there is no dispute. Protection of articles without need is against policy. Off2riorob (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: User blanked out this comment from their user talk page. User has been warned before about overstepping BLP in order to gratuitously engage in disruptive editing on Wikipedia. -- Cirt (talk) 21:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The above comments are inaccurate. As Off2riorob says, and the edit history shows, Off2riorob made one single revert of a BLP violation on the Stanley Pons BLP. He did not revert "back and forth repeatedly". He is entitled to delete posts on his talk page, which, incidentally, also features a barnstar he received from an admin yesterday, thanking him "For your outstanding work on Israel Shamir. When someone asks a question about BLPs in the admin chatroom on IRC, I point them in your direction. I can always trust with problematic BLP articles and frankly adminning would be a lot harder without your help!" The post from GWH did not feature the words "gratuitous" or "disruptive", nor any words that could be construed as remotely approaching these sentiments. It was well-meant and cordial advice to Off2riorob to be careful not to get himself into hot water in his BLP work, work that he is generally respected for. It pains me to see a good editor and wiki-mate mischaracterised in such a manner. --JN466 03:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Off2riorob (talk · contribs) has a tendency to engage in disruptive editing and edit-warring. On same talk page, post by another admin prior to the comment by Georgewilliamherbert, was that of admin PhilKnight [38]. All too often Off2riorob engages in a disruptive behavior pattern of attempting to get his way through reverting, as opposed to polite talk page discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Lansrob

In retrospect, since he's effectively only editing his talk page, that may not have had the stopping power you were hoping for... HalfShadow 22:37, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 22:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI: Meat, Libel, four AfDs, and assorted weirdness at David Bruce McMahan

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sven Manguard _Talk 02:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 02:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be the most experienced editor involved. Can you direct me as to how to handle the other two issues (the libel and the meat?) I just posted a response at ANI regarding those issues, but wanted to ask you personally, on account of your experience. Sven Manguard _Talk 02:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest filing a report to WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

edit warring in Ram Sharan Varma

I don't believe this. So now removing libelous claims from a BLP is considered edit warring? I tried to talk to the user in the article's talk page, and then in his talk page. He kept adding the libelous claims back and then started using abusive edit summaries. The fourth time i reverted, i promptly went to ANI asking others to take a look. The user then libeled the subject in the aNI thread (which had to be redacted) and warned. He abused other editors who agreed with me that the material was libel and had to be removed. The discussion was moved to BLP noticeboard where atleast four other editors (off2riorob, dougweller, dgg) agreed with my original position, that the additions were libel. The user then insults us some more there and disappears and all appears quiet.

Now you pop up seven days later and template me along with the libeler. Please read the threads before you drive away vandalism reverters with such thoughtless actions.--Sodabottle (talk) 05:16, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

There were a lot of reverts going on, back-and-forth and back-and-forth. Best to step back, report the matter, and engage in discussion, at the article's talk page, and if necessary, pursue WP:Dispute resolution. -- Cirt (talk) 05:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

There were about six reverts over two days. the second day i exceeded 3rr went straight to the ANI thread. And whats with putting "discussion" in quotes?. You are seriously suggesting i hold hands with a libeler and encourage him?. I was civil, to the point and told how to add it to the criticism section, if it can be sourced.

so if someone keeps adding "x is a paedophile" (unsourced) to a blp, i am to wait and report the matter and seek dispute resolution?. Did you even read the ANI and BLP noticeboard threads? --Sodabottle (talk) 06:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You could try to get someone else to intervene, rather than the back-and-forth reverts. -- Cirt (talk) 06:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

It was a BLP and i was being bold. Once i exceeded the 3rr limit i went to the ANI. This was not a content dispute. He was adding personal research and libelous statements for days in the article. A few other people had already reverted him without success. I step in, manage to stop him and i get slapped with a edit warring template. I don't think you are going to admit you made a mistake. I will drop it here and keep your template as an example what happens to people who try to revert vandalism --Sodabottle (talk) 06:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You were right to report it to ANI. You can try getting ahold of an admin over IRC in the future for issues like this. -- Cirt (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

WT:MFD

I've replied to your message at WT:MFD. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 06:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:56, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've gone through my current MfD nominations and tagged all of those pages, I think, though I may have missed some. Cunard (talk) 07:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! -- Cirt (talk) 07:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

We need a David Bruce McMahon page

How can he not be notable enough? Even light offenders are brought to light.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2010/10/memo_to_bruce_m.php?page=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.139.208 (talk) 11:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Regarding David Bruce McMahan, please see discussion about this at Admin Noticeboard Incidents. -- Cirt (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality

Nothing is real, nothing exists, 1 +1 =0 . Any statement alledging that anything is a fact or exists or any such specific statement is non-neutrali

mathematics is also non neutral if An article says "there are 50 states of the USA" that is not neutral, it is alledged that 1+1+1+1 (etc)= 50 and doing mathematics is not neutralal.

And so it is that my statemtnat that 2 and a bit years of 3 consecutive 20 year sentences is purely the same as a statement of mathematics.. its clear that she did not serve long enough, and that is a fact as un-neutral as you judge, its a clear fact that is beyond dispute, not even charles manson would dispute it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.92.35.71 (talk) 12:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what this is in regards to. -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Dominika Stará

Thanks for your help, Cirt. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Paul Watson

Please consider BLP guidance for BQZip01, I believe that the intent seen here is not helpful in improving a high visibility article on a controversial person. 68.28.104.229 (talk) 14:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you report the matter to WP:BLPN. -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Done, thank you. 68.28.104.248 (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Kshitij85

I noticed you blocked Kshitij85 on user name policy. If this is purely because of what appears to be in the middle of the name, you may want to reconsider. Kshitij is a perfectly legitimate Indian name. As he has already explained. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:47, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Unblocked. -- Cirt (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Ping

Hi, Cirt, I sent you an email. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

List of terrorist acts by Hindu extremists in India

I noticed you deleted Hindu jihad which was the original name for List of terrorist acts by Hindu extremists in India (someone changed the name during the AFD). The latter should be deleted too. TomCat4680 (talk) 01:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Hindu jihad

Hi. You deleted the redirect that resulted from the article being moved during the AfD, not the actual article; it's at List of terrorist acts by Hindu extremists in India, now. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

and now I see the message just above... Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Both now appear to be deleted. -- Cirt (talk) 06:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

There's the true original at:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindu_terrorism&oldid=388743028

Mebbe the old revs under the current redirect should be deleted, too; it's pretty much the content just discussed at the AfD. There were a variety of versions, depending one just when you looked ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

and even older versions deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindu terrorism. How big is this database now? Jack Merridew 07:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, deleted. -- Cirt (talk) 07:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. There are so many diffs that nothing really goes away, here. Endless copypasta site. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 07:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Terima kasih^ref Jack Merridew 07:52, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Username blocks

Hi Cirt. I'm wondering why you're systematically blocking editors with policy-compliant names like:

• MatthewCummins (talk · contribs · block log)
• Manj92 (talk · contribs · block log)
• Lolarola (talk · contribs · block log)

..the list goes on for a bit so I'll pause there for an answer. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, unblocked MatthewCummins (talk · contribs) and Lolarola (talk · contribs), the other was using Wikipedia only for self-promotion. -- Cirt (talk) 07:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that really answers the question, but anyway.. That one was a schoolkid writing barely more than a test page. First team football for Celtic? I noticed a whole pile of equally bad blocks while you were doing I think the G's the other day. Could you take more care with them. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, will keep that in mind in the future going forward. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 07:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Concerns about editor with what seems to me anyway to be a definite COI

I was wondering whether you might be interested in looking at some of the contributions recently made at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Massachusetts/Salem Witch Trials Task Force, and possibly some of the other comments elsewhere made by some of the editors there. I get the definite impression that one editor involved with the topic may have a very serious conflict of interests regarding this topic, but think that I might as an individual have a biased judgement on the matter. I am not naming anyone in particular; if you don't see comments which strike you as being at least potentially problematic, please feel free to ignore this as, possibly, an overreaction on my part. John Carter (talk) 22:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, will try to take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 18:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

David McMahan again

Though my edit summary in removing this probably should have been more along the lines of WP:UNDUE, it also seems like this edit was an attempt to circumvent the AFD. Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:22, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: I didn't touch this one, but the issue is also being covered in Streisand effect. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, it does appear to be circumventing the AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

closeure review

Could I ask you to please review your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krystyn Heide? This was a double nomination, and at closure there were four editors arguing for deletion of the Krystyn Heide article, but only the nominator had any problem with the Squarespace article, and thee editors (myself included) argued for its retention. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, would you mind leaving a note at the AFD, so that it's clearer for anybody who might follow-up and think the article was accidentally not deleted? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help! Be well. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome, -- Cirt (talk) 20:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

GA M-6 (Michigan highway)

I know this is a bit out of your subject area expertise, but I started a GA review of M-6 (Michigan highway) and there seems to be a difference of opinion with the author over how much explanatory material should be included to make the article self explanatory. I would appreciate a second set of eyes reading the article to see whether it should be clarified, particulary with respect to who designates roads as a part of the National Highway System and the use of exit number designations. I would appreciate if you could spend a couple of minutes looking it over and give your opinion. Thanks. Racepacket (talk) 21:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, suggest you try posting matter-of-fact, neutrally-worded-notices to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects. -- Cirt (talk) 00:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Please be clear about what you are doing

When you block an account, please leave a note on the talk page so that other editors don't see a red entry for the talk page of that IP address in the history log of the pages they have changed. Specifically, account 94.103.100.100, which appears in the log for Populus. Thank you. Nadiatalent (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 00:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

As I go through some of the articles, I will also make a note if one's not there already (I am making notes in the edit summaries). Cirt, you have blocked a good number of the socks I had identified, but I have the first few listed on my talk page. Let me know if you want them in another format or template to make checking them easier Flowanda | Talk 00:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

IRC

Heh, I'm chasing you around Wikimedia. Can you come on IRC to talk about a potential WN story? Kinda urgent. Thanks! :) Matthewedwards :  Chat  05:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 05:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

94.11.28.83 block

Hi. I saw 94.11.28.83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) reported at WP:AIV and I was starting to check it out when you blocked the IP based on what was reported to be a vandalistic edit:[39]] The name "DiC" certainly looks like schoolkid vandalism, but I don't think it was. The IP changed the Wikilink from  [[Cookie_Jar_Group#DIC_Entertainment|DiC]]  to  [[DiC]].  Our article, DiC, is about a company that's now part of Cookie_Jar_Group. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Unblocked.  Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 21:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Great work

Cirt, thank you for closing all the User:Mahia Yahia and Koraiem MfDs. Nearly 50 MfDs by my count. Great work! Cunard (talk) 01:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thanks for thanking me! Much appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 01:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thats my name

You have blocked me but Kshitij is a Indian name. How can i change my name?? (Kshitij85 (talk) 05:30, 13 October 2010 (UTC))

Replied at user talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 05:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem, although this is the second time i am facing this problem. But its ok. Thanks (Kshitij85 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 05:36, 13 October 2010 (UTC).

Zend Certified Engineer

Could you please take a second look at the Zend Certified Engineer deletion discussion?

IMHO there was no consensus to merge, nor valid arguments to do so. The arguments for merging are extraneous and/or are in conflict with the guidelines for merging, "Merging should not be considered if" :

1. The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross linked) articles
2. The topics are discrete subjects and deserve their own articles even though they may be short

Some users have argued that the topic is "not particularly notable", in spite of the fact that reliable sources that discuss 'Zend Certified Engineer' are cited.

The claim that the book "PHP: The Good Parts" cannot be "checked" or that it only mentions ZCE in one sentence is completely false. The book is easily "checked" by anyone who bothers to actually read it. I made a reference to the page of the first mention, which is located at the beginning of the book in the introduction summary chapter and is one sentence long. However, ZCE is discussed throughout the book in many chapters as well as in other reliable sources.

Thanks,

Ofus (talk) 08:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I did not close that AFD, try asking with the closing admin. -- Cirt (talk) 08:16, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

David Miscavige

What is the purpose of improving David Miscavige' page ? --Japarthur (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Will reply at user's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for EXtremeDB

An editor has asked for a deletion review of EXtremeDB. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 15:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice, -- Cirt (talk) 20:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

129.94.130.81

Thanks for checking out the report and blocking them. The IP is rather annoying he loves to attack TeaDrinker--iGeMiNix/What's up?/My Stuff 20:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 20:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

No they don't

"direct quotations need cites at end of sentences. The citations cover everything that precedes them; it's unnecesary clutter to repeat the same citation after every sentence. Malleus Fatuorum 23:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong, but not going to revert over it. The FA will just remain in a sub-standard level of quality. -- Cirt (talk) 23:18, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

One of us is certainly wrong, but it isn't me. Let me just say that I find your general attitude to be apalling, and I now fully understand why Giano refused to have anything to do with your vindictive FAR campaign against him. I on the other hand will continue to work on improving this article instead of idly criticising it, despite your best efforts at sabotage. Malleus Fatuorum 23:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I believe I have seen from your behavior in the past, that on your user talk page you do not appreciate users being impolite towards you, when they choose to go over and comment there. -- Cirt (talk) 23:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I believe that you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. Malleus Fatuorum 23:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

[40] -- Cirt (talk) 23:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Please, I request that you do not use such language at my user talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 23:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for National Foundation for Women Legislators

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

A word of advice

- I didn't see the Malleus/Cirt affair until today, but I have now read it and the FAR that preceded it. Without expressing any opinion on Malleus' definitions of what on earth might constitute incivility, I would like to point out that your posts throughout the FAR are exactly the kind of thing that make me dump any involvement in a FAR. In fact I've walked away from FARs, though without comment, for far less. I appreciate you were just trying to list the faults of the article as you saw them but can I ask you to read that FAR again from the mindset of someone who is trying to effect actual improvements. Can you try and understand how your tone and apparently peremptory demands may well lead an editor to just write sofixit in huge letters across the page and then push off? It's human nature. If someone instructs you to do something that you were doing anyway, you think "no, I won't!". Yours with the best of intentions, Fainites ^barleyscribs 10:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Fainites, I thank you for the input, and especially the respectful and polite way in which you have imparted it. I will take your words under advisement in the future. -- Cirt (talk) 10:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I issued an apology to Malleus [41]. -- Cirt (talk) 06:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Alex Nackman wiki page

October 15, 2010

Cirt,

I have made the changes you had requested and added a number of references. I was hoping we could re-instate the Alex Nackman wiki page. Please let me know.

Thanks.

Page and changes are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Musicman5/Alex_Nackman

Musicman5 (talk) 16:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Mark

Please format the cites, using WP:CIT templates. -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the Bacon Challenge 2011!

Since you signed up, you get an official Bacon Challenge welcome message:

Hi, Cirt, and welcome to the Bacon Challenge 2011! The goal of this event is to expand as much bacon-related content as possible, so get started whenever you can! A side event to the Bacon Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup 2011, an event where participants in the Bacon Challenge have a chance to score points for creating and expanding bacon-related content, all while trying to score as high as they can. Be sure to submit all your bacon-related contributions to the submissions page in order to score points. At the end of the Cup, the winner will get a nice trophy along with all other participants receiving a medal for their efforts (virtual, of course; don't go waiting by your mailbox for it). For any questions or comments regarding the Challenge, please head on over here, and for any questions or comments relating to the Cup, go here. Thanks and good luck. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:10, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Blocking

Another user has made the almost the same edits to 90210 (season 1) as this IP: User talk:24.18.37.151 that you blocked. User:99hgbh is the one I'm thinking is a sockpuppet of the IP. Could you please review the summary of 90210 season 1 and check out the comment here made by user:99hgbh. What do you think? I've gone ahead and reverted the edits, but I won't post on their talk page until I get your opinion on if you think it's a sockpuppetry case. Jayy008 (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd suggest WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. How active are they? Jayy008 (talk) 22:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I mean I would suggest you file a request for investigation at WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 22:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I have done, HERE, how long will it take you think? Jayy008 (talk) 22:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking more to file it as a full, separate, actual case page. -- Cirt (talk) 22:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon!

Hi Cirt, I think you may have left a message for Dmries on my talk page (or maybe ya did a copy and paste to a few people and forgot to change the name... I've done that a few times). Either way, checking out the upcoming Bacon Challenge to see how I can participate. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 19:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it, I had meant it for you too, sorry. :) -- Cirt (talk) 20:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

why'd my comments get deleted?

I entered some comments in a discussion for deletion about a page I created , and the comments I made were removed, and not ony was the page deleted, it was deleted out of my profile as well. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erafalko (talk • contribs) 05:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Your comments were removed, apparently accidentally, by another user here: [42]. Cirt's stalker = --Jayron32 06:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Bringing home the bacon!

		The Bacon Barnstar
		For all you do, this bacon's for you. Thanks for taking the bull by the horns (or the pig by the tail) and creating the most deserving WikiProject of all. Cheers. kelapstick (talk) 08:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Most appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 08:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate canvassing

Posting an invitation to join the bacon project on 70 user talk pages (I think I did two edits on that page over three years ago) is inappropriate canvassing, in my opinion. Han-Kwang (t) 10:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Um, it is just an invitation, take it or leave it. There is no ongoing discussion that could be seen as being influenced. -- Cirt (talk) 10:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

/* Your assistance please */

I request userification of Associated Press library of Guantanamo Bay detainee dossiers to User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Associated Press library of Guantanamo Bay detainee dossiers. I'd like the full revision history and talk page please.

IIRC I suggested userification on Talk:Associated Press library of Guantanamo Bay detainee dossiers over a year ago.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 02:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 03:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I would like to ask additional assistance. Could you merge the history of User:Geo Swan/working/AP List with User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Associated Press library of Guantanamo Bay detainee dossiers. Back in 2007 I didn't know one could move a page from user space to article space.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 02:47, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

AfD

Hi Cirt, Please explain what does 'relist' for more discussion mean on the Catholic views on Mary AfD? Thanks.Malke 2010 (talk) 16:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Means it will continue to be discussed for seven days, or until another admin comes by and determines there is a consensus and able to close it. -- Cirt (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Afd close

Per your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Hakim Jan (Argandab druglord), you may want to have a look at Abdul Hakim Jan (Argandab warlord). Thanks! Location (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Silvio Pollio

Hi, Thanks for protecting the page. I sure picked an interesting one to learn about wikipedia editing. LOL. Anyhow, I was wondering why you added the refimproveBLP tag to the page. 3 different major canadian newspapers, plus a couple smaller locals are referenced. I even found the court documents via google search, but thought I read somewhere those should not be used? However: Policy shortcut: WP:WELLKNOWN clearly states = "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. So could the refimprove BLP tag be removed please. Or could you clarify for me what would need to be improved? Thanks.Bluebadger1 (talk) 17:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC) Also commented on BLP boards for reference. [43] Bluebadger1 (talk) 17:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Responded at WP:BLPN. -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon

Congrats on making WikiProject Bacon. I joined too. I saw you use the Bacon Donut image i got to VP status for the Project, i thought it was a good image too.Spongie555 (talk) 19:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and yes it was. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Portal move

I'm currently checking into doing this, however, I believe it is possible for me to complete the task. Please note that this may take a little bit of time, as I must set it up and get it approved; perhaps around 2 weeks (I'll see if I can move it through BAG faster because it's a smaller task). THENEWMONO™ 04:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Deshastha Brahmin

A while back you reviewed Deshastha Brahmin in response to a GA nomination but it didn't pass at that time. I've re-nominated it after a peer review, copy-edit, and the changes you had recommended. Just wanted to let you know of the nomination since you had mentioned back then to notify you of the re-nomination. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering if you had an interest in reviewing it again. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Apology

Cirt, I owe you a couple of apologies. After we spoke off-wiki, I realized that it would have been better to post a question about your behaviour at FAR to your talk page, as Fainites did above. There was no reason for me to complain about your behaviour at Sandy's page without trying your talk page first, particularly since you and I are not complete strangers and have occasionally interacted in the past. I read a quite negative construction into your actions instead of assuming good faith, and I apologize for that too. The off-wiki conversation has made it clear to me that you did not intend your actions to be construed as they were. I hope that we can avoid any more misunderstandings. Thanks, and I hope you can forgive me for not talking to you first. -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. This is most appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

De brief voor de Koning

Sure and it's my pleasure; happy to be of help. Excellent article; keep up the good work! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Dominika Stará

Hello Cirt. I apologize for bothering you repeatedly ... I left a comment at the Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons, however, my note remained unnoticed. Should I move the section to the bottom of the noticeboard? Thanks for any help/advice. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you help me please?

The article Tom Quinn (Spooks) quickfailed GA because the article was in a need of a copyedit. Since you previously worked on Adam Carter. I was wondering if you can copyedit that article for me. Thank you. -- Matthew RD 14:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Will take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you follow the advice of the GA Reviewer, and take the article to peer review before going for GAN again. The GA Reviewer in particular is one I have come across to have sound judgment, so I would advise against contesting the review itself. -- Cirt (talk) 14:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Email...

Hi Cirt, I got your email. I prefer not to take part in off-wiki discussions if I can help it; it's rare that I'm up on my emails anyway - sometimes I go weeks without checking it. Karanacs (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Alright. No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 14:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Careful

You deleted the access date. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 16:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I deleted the URL as well, so there is no longer a need for an accessdate to state when the URL was last accessed. -- Cirt (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

No you didn't... OrangeDog (τ • ε) 16:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for pointing that out.  Done! -- Cirt (talk) 16:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Chronicle

Hi Cirt, I was thinking about creating the page Pennsylvania Chronicle and discovered that a page with this name was deleted once before. Before and if I take on such an undertaking I would be interested in knowing why the previous article was deleted. The approach for the article I have in mind will be on an historic level, covering the paper's involvement in the American Revoulution and will highlight people like William Goddard, the paper's founder, and Benjamin Franklin who also was associated with the publication. Any advice and other information you may have would be greatly appreciated. All the best. -- GWillHickers (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Was deleted, after AFD, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Chronicle. -- Cirt (talk) 06:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

IP 82.5.224.162 is now 86.29.113.118

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that the IP address you blocked 82.5.224.162 has resurfaced under the IP 86.29.113.118. S/he seems to be vandalizing the same articles on the new IP. 90.201.150.226 (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you try WP:AIV or file a report, at WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 06:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Roger Waters FAC

We would like your help concluding the FAC for Roger Waters. — GabeMc (talk) 03:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, will try to take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 06:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Article

Hello.

Just wondering how I can get an article up? I mean, someone tried, a pro writer, and it was deleted. I have all links and facts proving the article. Please help. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oplexicon (talk • contribs) 11:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

G8

Hi. Could you please let me know why this page (Comparison_of_knowledge_management_software) has been deleted? It seems to be a normal page like Comparison_of_FTP_client_software or Comparison_of_file_managers. And I do not see anything related to the G8. Please elaborate. Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The.aloner (talk • contribs) 12:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Was deleted after WP:AFD discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of knowledge base management software. -- Cirt (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick answer. I believe there are two main problems with the page: links to external websites that make it a link farm, and non-neutral characteristics for some features. In other aspects is seems to be valuable because it gives some comparison for software in this industry. I'm learning several examples of comparison pages and it seems to me that solving these two problems may make this page more appropriate. I think I can start remaking the page. How do you think, is that better to make changes to the currently moved page or it is better to apply changes if page is undeleted? -- The.aloner (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I've modified the page and removed link farm and non-neutral parts. I believe it can be undeleted now and further imporoved. The.aloner (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Not seeing any WP:RS secondary source coverage. -- Cirt (talk) 11:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Note to self - portal Bacon

Portal:Bacon -- additions, help, etc. -- Cirt (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Congrats on making Portal Bacon it looks good. Spongie555 (talk) 23:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I see your really good with Portals. Could you help me in Portal:Bhutan. I made it but I'm bad with portals and the only help I'm getting is from someone in Russian wikipedia. Spongie555 (talk) 23:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

If you liked my efforts at Portal:Bacon, I would suggest you look there for ways to reformat Portal:Bhutan. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Just FYI

Nom here was actually a banned editor - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks! -- Cirt (talk) 06:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Advanced Ability Centre / Advanced Ability Center

I've just noticed that there seem to have been two organisations of that name, one in England (... Centre, redirecting to Scientology in the United Kingdom), and the other one founded by Mayo (... Center). Do you know if they were somehow related? --JN466 23:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I am not yet certain, but it would seem to be the same or similar or related. I note you have still yet failed to place a notice at the talk page of Advanced Ability Center regarding material taken from the article David Miscavige, in order to satisfy copyright? -- Cirt (talk) 06:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

What is the proper way of doing that? --JN466 16:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean; I hadn't been to the David Miscavige talk page recently. Following what you wrote there, I made these edits. Does this adequately address the concern? --JN466 18:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Jason calling...

Cirt, since you're on duty (haha), what to do about this, The Bourn Legacy (film)? Simply blank and redirect? Merge and redirect? What I mean is, what are you going to do, with your administrative and moral powers, since I'm going to bed? Thanks! (Oh, you'll be pleased to know that my daughter went shopping with me and picked the most expensive bacon they had in the supermarket, thick-sliced and applewood-smoked.) Drmies (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, merged the two page histories together. -- Cirt (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, if you have a moment, please explain, in a nutshell, what you did and why--does it hinge on the fact that the recent article, with the incorrect title, has verified content? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, what you did here, I think I tried that to but couldn't (if I remember correctly) because the article (well, redirect) was already there--but you can do this as an administrator? Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Yup. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Question about a deleted page

Hi,

My name is Ido, C Few month ago we added our page to Wikipedia, and for some reason it was deleted and cannot be edited now. Page location was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shvoong

We accept your concern about high quality in Wikipedia, and would like to know how can we improve our page to be acceptable, high quality, and suit the Wikipedia site. Any remark, demand or suggestion will be treated, and actions will be taken as necessary.

Thanks a lot Ido —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.179.37.179 (talk • contribs)

Replied at User talk:80.179.37.179. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cirt. You have new messages at Acather96's talk page.
Message added 19:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ah okay thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

extremedb

I saw your name at the top of the discussion page on the Extremedb article deletion. You are the editor to contact to restart that discussion, correct? It is unclear as to why it was deleted: notability, or tone/content? No justification is given for the criticisms of “spam” or “reads like an ad.” The persons who made those comments seem to have an agenda other than article content quality or factuality. And, I don’t think an argument has been made against the article’s notability, and the content of the article itself, as I recall it, has some good evidence that supports notability. Is there a way we can actually look at the article, to consider various points? It seems pointless to discuss the article without examining exactly what we are talking about.

Other than contacting you, are there steps I must take in order to start a reconsideration of this deletion?

Svpcom (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

This was deleted after WP:AFD, and already went through one deletion review, at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 13. -- Cirt (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

FAC

Hey, thanks for the congrats :) I also submitted Taare Zameen Par for FAC today, if you are interested in Bollywood films, lol. Ωphois 01:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Elise Harris deletion

Hello. I was working a little on trying to improve a page that was recently deleted and I would like to know how I can set about trying to undelete it. I didn't get a chance to take part in the discussion as I didn't realise what was happening until it was too late. It seems to have got a little fraught and doesn't seem to have argued much based on policy. Anyway, I tried to read up on policy and tried to rewrite the page with better sourcing and referencing and thought that that was adequate. I checked all the rules and they said that it is possible to recreate an article as long as it is not exactly the same as the one deleted. The new one was not the same as it focused on poetry in recognised journals and journalism - two things that were not referenced very well in the deleted article. Also the other article was deleted very quickly before I had chance to prepare an argument showing notability. The new article was deleted quickly with G4 given as a reason - G4 says: A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via a deletion discussion. This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, The new page was not the same as the one deleted, I was at pains to re-source all the references and focus on only the things that could be proved as notable using adequate references. It was not identical as I made sure none of the things that were problematic were still there. I am sorry if I did this wrong. Again, is there any way to start a discussion for undeletion of the page (based on the newer version with better references rather than the old one which had some failings?) Sorry if I have gone about this the wrong way, and thanks for your help. Alwayssoma (talk) 03:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC) Oh, the newer page I was working on was Elise V. Harris. I substantially rewrote and re-sourced. Sorry again if I have overstepped the mark - I thought I had read the policies correctly.

Alwayssoma (talk) 03:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a link to where the page was located? -- Cirt (talk) 06:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fight or Flight (Star Trek: Enterprise)

Despite the fact that the majority view was "merge" and that most of the "Keep" votes said "well, sources must exist for this" yet none of them actually found anything significant? Black Kite (t) (c) 06:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way, but it is an incorrect assessment. -- Cirt (talk) 06:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

OK then - you said "Significant comments from multiple editors ... have shown there is enough reliable secondary source coverage to retain this article". If mine is an incorrect assessment, what is that coverage, and why does the article still contain precisely none? At the moment, the only sources are primary or trivial mentions and the article still fails WP:NOT#PLOT. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

AFD is not for cleanup. -- Cirt (talk) 06:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup is where an article is obviously notable, but in a poor state. That doesn't apply here. I'm sorry, but if you're closing a contentious AfD, you need to back up your rationale. Again, what is the reliable secondary source coverage that you claim has been found by multiple editors? Black Kite (t) (c) 06:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and provided some helpful links at the talk page. It looks like some editors have already begun positive quality improvement work on the article. :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll give that a definite "Hmm" :) I think the best thing is to give the article a little bit of time, but I have this horrible feeling that, as usual, now it's been kept no-one will bother actually trying to improve it. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wrong. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 06:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Of course, if you're going to do it yourself, my comment does not apply :) Black Kite (t) (c) 07:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I have been trying for the past twenty minutes now. But this funny little bright orange bar keeps appearing at the top of the page, while I am attempting to improve the article. Kinda makes it more difficult to do research and add material to improve the quality of the page. :P -- Cirt (talk) 07:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Catholicism

Hi Cirt, I'm not sure, but it appears to me that User:Cresix is on some kind of anti-Catholic drive by removing the Category:American Roman Catholics from every article where the person's religion isn't cited. But he's not doing it for Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc. How is something like this usually looked into/handled? Thanks, Markvs88 (talk) 12:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

You could try WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 12:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK in T:AH

I don't know if there is a way to do a DYK action, but note that there is now a "dykentry" field in T:AH.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I do not know how.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:48, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Kutch Kadva Patidar

Please review deletion of article Kutch Kadva Patidar. I have already given resons on deletion talk page i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kutch_Kadva_Patidar Thanks Kutchipatel (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Please do not post to WP:AFD pages after closure. -- Cirt (talk) 11:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sauganash Hotel

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I commend you on your editorial contributions and diligent review. Please post this on your user page.

This user helped promote Sauganash Hotel to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 06:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Yellow Monkey- his abuse of authority

Please read my user pageandycjp (talk) 06:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok I am sorry if you regard it as such. Please could you undelete Buddhism and violence as the page should be improved not deleted. His judgement was too hasty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andycjp (talk • contribs)

one section has one sentence

One section has one sentence. That looks pretty no-can-do-ish. I'd move it to the section below, but leave that to you. later! • Ling.Nut 11:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Frankie Martinez entry

Hi Cirt,

I would like to provide the additional support requested for Frankie Martinez's entry.

So do I request to have the article restored to my userspace so I can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to the deletion?

Please advise on the next appropriate steps. Thank you.

Xenergizerx (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC) Gary gsu@abakuadancers.org

 Done, now at User:Xenergizerx/Frankie Martinez. -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Cwestllc

FYI: [44]. I'm nuking it since it's not appropriate talk page discussion, but I figured I'd let you know in case the user becomes active again, or if you wanted to follow up on it. Gigs (talk) 02:17, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon WikiCup 2011

Pages

• Wikipedia:Bacon WikiCup
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon Challenge 2011
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011/Submissions

History

• User:Sky Attacker/Bacon WikiCup 2010
• User:ChildofMidnight/Bacon Challenge 2010

Ideas

1. Films? — Bacon Grabbers, Canadian Bacon, Slaughterhouse (film) (aka Bacon Bits)
2. Books? — search on authors from prior year, also: Don't Forget the Bacon! by Pat Hutchins; Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon by Craig Fass, Brian Turtle, and Mike Ginelli
3. Drinks? — Bacon and Tomato Sandwich, Bacon Liquor & Tomato
4. Quality upgrade? — quality upgrade on articles from prior year: Everything Tastes Better with Bacon, The Bacon Cookbook, The BLT Cookbook, Bacon: A Love Story

-- Cirt (talk) 10:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Started peer review for one from prior: Wikipedia:Peer review/Everything Tastes Better with Bacon/archive1. -- Cirt (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Bacon, {{WikiProject Bacon}}, {{User Bacon}}. -- Cirt (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Addressed most of the stuff from the peer review. Next up: book, portal. -- Cirt (talk) 17:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Portal done, at Portal:Bacon. -- Cirt (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon peer review = done. Next up for peer review = Bacon: A Love Story. -- Cirt (talk) 10:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon: A Love Story - up for peer review, now ongoing at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bacon: A Love Story/archive1. -- Cirt (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Created article = Don't Forget the Bacon!. -- Cirt (talk) 07:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Emily Schooley

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Emily Schooley. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Misssinformative (talk) 09:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The page was submitted for deletion by employees at Frozen North Productions, after Schooley outed them for poor business practices. See (http://emilyschooley.com/blog/?p=185)

The page existed for months, and both myself and others made efforts to find more credible articles with neutral points of view from reliable sources.

That it was "coincidentally" submitted for deletion just after Schooley posted her blog post is suspicious. Myself and others made efforts to revise the page after the original request for deletion was submitted, and tried to include more articles that met WP:N and WP:NPOV

We would like to see it undeleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misssinformative (talk • contribs) 08:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

If you like you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could make such a copy available, if you wish it. -- Cirt (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I suppose. Are you able to see the differences between the page when it was submitted for deletion originally and the revised version from when it was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misssinformative (talk • contribs) 08:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Misssinformative/Emily Schooley. -- Cirt (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. So what exactly can I do with that and how do I get it undeleted? How do I access the page from my pages? Misssinformative (talk) 08:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 08:41, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you tell me what is unsatisfactory or does not meet notable guidelines for actors in the current version?Misssinformative (talk) 09:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I am also wondering about this. Having met Emily Schooley , seen her speak at conferences, and seen her work on screen, I feel that she meets the general notability guides at least, if not the notable guidelines for actors. I can provide scans of the conference guide in which I have seen her live at if the video is not enough evidence to show that she has done public speaking on the film industry. She is not a close personal friend of mine in any way, but she is someone that I have enjoyed seeing at conferences and watching her work develop over time. She has been credited for a significant amount of work, perhaps even statistically significant outside of one standard deviation above the mean based upon the mean of colleagues in her age range and gender. I wonder how an authority such as IMDB can have a page with the popularity that it does, and a resource such as Wikipedia will remove what I see as a page on someone wholly worth noting. That being said, I am seemingly misunderstanding the guidelines considering that the article was in fact deleted. I would like to endeavor to have her page restored. Would you be willing to guide me on how to correct the page so that it is in compliance said guidelines? Chaulis1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC).

Deletion review was closed, with result deletion endorsed, at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 23. -- Cirt (talk) 21:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Please close WP:BLP/N

Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Paul_Watson has run its course. — BQZip01 — ^talk 08:46, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I hesitate to protect the talk-page. Please post a request to WP:RFPP about that, linking to the WP:BLPN thread. That will hopefully draw in more admins to look into this. -- Cirt (talk) 08:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't really care about the page protection so much, but I see no reason to keep the BLP "discussion" open. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)