User talk:Guerillero/Archives/2012/January

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Happy new year and we will see you contributing in 2012 of the new year. We are hoping to see and help to make Wikipedia better! Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 22:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

thanks --Guerillero | My Talk 01:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

• Interview: The Gardner interview

• News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

• WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

• Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

• Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 15:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: December 2011

This Month in GLAM – Volume I, Issue XII, December 2011 USA report • UK report • Italy report • France report • Spain report • Netherlands report Australasia report • Russia report • Israel report • Africa report • Event calendar Read this edition in full • Single-page Headlines USA report: Cultural Partnerships co-ordinator for the US, fine art editathon and QRpedia case study UK report: GLAM Ambassador visits Germany; Wikinews given tour of Scottish National Portrait Gallery re-opening Italy report: Creative Commons conference France report: GLAMcamp in Amsterdam, Wiki Loves Monuments in the National Museum of Middle Ages Spain report: GLAM-Wiki conference in Girona; Catalonian painting donation Netherlands report: GLAMcamp Amsterdam Australasia report: Australian Paralympic Committee and other Australian and New Zealand GLAM efforts Russia report: Wiki Loves Monuments in Russia Israel report: Wrapping up 2011 Africa report: WikiAfrica: Cultural institutions contributing to African knowledge on Wikipedia To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Test version of FtCG

I am finding the admin deletion function of FtCG rather difficult to test. I would appreciate it if you could lend a hand by downloading this special version of FtCG and trying to transfer and delete an image. It should generate a Stack.txt file, which contains some hopefully useful debugging information. Sorry to bother you about it. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

will do. It wasn't working for me before --Guerillero | My Talk 16:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Kārththikai Pengal

• Had a question regarding the deletion of articles, I agree that the article has references, it doesnt seem to have enough content to qualify as a separate article. Isn't this duplicating the topic Murugan, could I nominate it for A10? Gsingh (talk) 18:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks!Gsingh (talk) 05:33, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Welcome --Guerillero | My Talk 05:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Can I direct you to the comments I left on Snowolf's talk page? Snowolf appears to have been offline since 12/25, so I thought I would let you know since you were involved in that incident as well. Thanks. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 18:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I will look at this tonight --Guerillero | My Talk 21:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 00:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

What I see is worrisome, but there isn't enough here to warrant me doing anything --Guerillero | My Talk 01:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

File Mover

Hello. Thanks for giving me filemover permissions. You mentioned in your reply an issue you had with one of my uploads; is that in reference to PD-Author on this file? Thanks. Yazan (talk) 22:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Uploads such as this, this, this, this and this are officially non free files --Guerillero | My Talk 05:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, yes. Those were uploaded last year, the license should be changed to fair use. The passport however is a page in my own passport, that I scanned myself. How is that not free? Yazan (talk) 06:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The layout and formatting of your passport is copyrighted by your government. --Guerillero | My Talk 20:11, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thanks, I'll be careful with other uploads! Happy editing. Yazan (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

.. for THIS. I had considered just doing it myself, but as I had in the past edited the article AND opined at the 2010 AFD, I thought it best to have a second set of eyes. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 06:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

• Technological roadmap: 2011's technological achievements in review, and what 2012 may hold

• News and notes: Fundraiser 2011 ends with a bang

• In the news: Wikipedia ends annual fundraising drive; Monmouthpedia launches

• WikiProject report: From Traditional to Experimental: WikiProject Jazz

• Featured content: Contentious FAC debate: a week in review

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Betacommand 3

• Technology report: December in more detail; and why the MediaWiki codebase was "slushed" this week

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 04:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Move to Commons

Please understand that you should see the picture on Commons and not on Wikipedia. You have marked my transfer unacceptable. I have added the author so you must mark it as acceptable now.--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 06:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I will look into it --Guerillero | My Talk 00:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

No, but

I suggest you read as much of what TCO was replying to as you can.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Your userpage is done

Sitting in my sandbox; make what changes you will with it. Had some fun playing around with {{gradient}} and -moz-transform with this one. Colors don't exactly match up, but you can change that if you'd like; you should make what changes you may and then transfer onto your userpage once you have a satisfactory result. Oh, and do tell me if it looks strange, I'm running Firefox over here. Cheers, ResMar 04:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Specifically, I could add a small boxed preview of the contents of your sandboxes if you'd like. For your talk page I think the banner and a bit of extra formatting will do, assuming my revisions are acceptable of course. ResMar 05:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I am liking the colors and the layout. It is beautiful. I will look through wikipedia for a better quote. While I believe that the quote is true, it might not be the best idea to be at the top of an admin's page... --Guerillero | My Talk 05:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

True, true. ResMar 12:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You are the best. :D If you would be willing to add a banner to my talk page it would be cool. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 01:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Formatted your talk page, colors are open to change. ResMar 03:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Darussalam Academy

The director has contacted wikipedia. Can you tell me when the article will come back please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffernutter2 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome on WikiProject Women's sport

Genevieve has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Thank you :) If you need anything just give me a yell --Guerillero | My Talk 01:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs				Cleanup
		The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the 21st Century				Don Williams discography
		Anthony Snodgrass				Hardline (subculture)
		Pioneer Field (Tusculum)				Randy Newman discography
		Freshwater Place		Merge
		Release early, release often				Dave Reid
		Edna McConnell Clark Foundation				Melbourne Magistrates' Court
		Pirate Party of Kazakhstan				List of countries by percentage of water area
		Enclosed A		Add sources
		California gubernatorial election, 1958				The Skulls (Canadian band)
		The Alley Cats (punk rock band)				Negative FX
		Petit-de-Grat, Nova Scotia				Dental braces
		Beyond Television Productions		Wikify
		Punk film				The Legend of Neil
		5-hour Energy				Guy Hartcup
		All My Life (Billy Joel song)				Dot Cycle and Motor Manufacturing Company
		Adapalene/benzoyl peroxide		Expand
		Henning Schulzrinne				Tales of Vesperia
		Polarsets				Black Roses (The Rasmus album)
		Trembling Bells				Black Friday (shopping)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

about my concern

Hi, i have to ask you to reconsider my request. Because i have enough evidence to prove that a single sockpuppeter is behind all this: The I.P.s that i reported in Wikipedia:AIV have an identical edit patern to the edits from the user Mr Pyles see: [1] and [2]; [3] and [4]; [5] and [6]; [7] and [8] for example. And there are more, I started to suspect from these I.P.s and that user like a month ago and i found out that it's something rather serious: It's behavoir to another editors is abusive, and have been activelly doing edits with it's socks accounts for like ten months, please reconsider Lonelyraider (talk) 03:27, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a link to my previous report for further evidence: [9] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelyraider (talk • contribs) 03:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Mr Pyles (talk · contribs) was using a program called WP:popups to revert, what he considered, vandalism. His overlap with the editwarring IPs is only coincidental. As for the ever changing IP address, it appears that the IP is a Dynamic IP. It can change several times a day. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Could be, but i still suspicious, i traced the I.P.s and like Mr Pyles, are from Canada: [10], [11], [12], [13], also stills curious that most of his edits are genre related. Maybe a Checkuser would be a good idea, and even if discarding "Mr. Pyles" these I.P.s are from someone who is abusing multiple accounts don't you think? Lonelyraider (talk) 04:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

There isn't a checkuser onwiki that would connect a named user, in good standing with the community, with an IP. The IPs still look like one person with a dynamic address. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 04:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, thank you anyway. Lonelyraider (talk) 04:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative

Hi Guerillero,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:32, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wanderer above the Sea of Fog

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Caspar David Friedrich - Der Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

My second favorite painting --Guerillero | My Talk 06:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Fail/monobook.js

Since I can't edit that page, I'm bringing it here. Could it please be deleted under g5?Jasper Deng (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Guerillero | My Talk 06:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!Jasper Deng (talk) 06:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 18:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Query

Hi, Guerillero. Many thanks for your help with closing AfDs. I did have a question as to one close. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mater Dolorosa Catholic School (South San Francisco), I myself had indicated an openness to a redirect. But the consensus was against me, it seems. Two editors joined me in saying that that was a viable close. But 4 editors were in favor of deletion, which I was also open to -- and some explained why they thought a redirect would not be appropriate. It was a long AfD, so that may have gotten lost in the review. I just thought I should bring it to your attention, because while it met one of my options for close, it did not seem to garner consensus support. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out to me. These primary school closures are running together. I try to avoid raw vote counting but I see that I was wrong. I will change my closure. --Guerillero | My Talk 00:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking another look, with an open mind. Thanks again for all your good work. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Redirects

Hi Guerillo. Thanks for closing AfDs. When you create a redirect, especially for a school, please remember to include the {{R from school}} template on the redirect page as it automatically populates an important category. Also, do check that the school is mentioned or listed on the target page and consider adding it if it is not. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I am trying to do my best. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 06:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Unequal Treatment of new article on Africa

You deleted an article on the African Legal Information Institute. Since you didn't bother to engage with the reasons I gave for the notability of the article it is not clear why you did so.

What is clear is that unequal treatment given to African content. Apparently having a legal information institute in Australia or Canada is notable even when the entries on them Australasian Legal Information Institute and CanLII rely almost entirely on the websites of the institutes themselves. However apparently a continent wide initiative is not notable if that continent is Africa. You may refer to the guidelines all you like but if they are applied inconsistently then objectivity is called into question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angrynative (talk • contribs) 04:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

We need things to be backed up by multiple reliable sources for inclusion on wiki, sorry. We have nothing against Africa, we just have a notability requirement that can be fairly stringent. Looking over the article again, I can't find anywhere in the text that explains why the topic is important beyond the fact that it exits. Ignoring WP:WAX, Australasian Legal Information Institute is backed up by 7 other sources and CanLII should be deleted. --Guerillero | My Talk 06:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

As I explained in the talk page the infinitive is notable because it is continent wide. I notice that you didn't engage the reasons that I gave on the talk page but simply deleted the article. You still have explained why a continent wide initiative is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angrynative (talk • contribs) 12:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

• Special report: English Wikipedia to go dark on January 18

• Sister projects: What are our sisters up to now?

• News and notes: WMF on the looming SOPA blackout, Wikipedia turns 11, and Commons passes 12 million files

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Beer

• Featured content: Lecen on systemic bias in featured content

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, Betacommand case deadlocked, Muhammad images close near

• Technology report: ArticleFeedback moves into new trial phase; and how MediaWiki integrates with Facebook, IPv6, and PostgreSQL explored

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Rattling the can

I recall that you hoped to publish something in the Signpost on why FS is no more once you were done digesting the proceedings. Are those plans still good? ResMar 04:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I will consider writing and op-ed on something. FS was such a drama pit that I think it is best to let people move on. Especially because I strongly believe that FS came down because of three events. They caused a topic ban from FS to be handed out and another user to retire in a dramasplosion --Guerillero | My Talk 07:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I dunno, I still think it is important to leave some cohesive proceedings about what happened. Your call. As for drama pits, I've steered clear of them as best I may lately—nothing but trouble, although I've had my fair share. ResMar 23:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

user:Angrynative

I popped back onto this new user's talk page a day or so ago and basically gave him a shakedown on what to do for new articles. He has been made aware of the content requirements if only by linkage. As far as I'm concerned, you're vindicated. =) --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

User talk response

Hello, Guerillero. You have new messages at User:Jedd Raynier.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

01:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome

Hi Guerillero, not sure if my reply here is warranted (I don't know of any other option yet), but just wanted to say thanks and: How did you spot me and was there anything to specifically critize? Your writing was a template, so I ask. Secondly, a specific question of mine would be that on the history page of articles sometimes the amendment "(top)" is made on changes in a line. What is that, who adds this or is this automatic? I tried to find information about it by searching, but I wasn't successful. --Philipp Grunwald (talk) 04:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I saw your edits at urban exploration. :) I don't have any extra information about this top thing. sorry. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:35, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

(tps) It only appears on contribution pages to show if a particular edit is the last made on a given page. So for example, if I'm looking at Guerillero's contributions page, I see 23:35, January 20, 2012 (diff | hist) m User talk:Philipp Grunwald ‎ (Talkback (User talk:Guerillero) (TW)) (top), meaning his edit was the last edit made on the User talk:Philipp Grunwald page. As soon as someone else edits that page, then the (top) will disappear from that entry on Guerillero's contribution list. The tag does not appear on history pages, as there is no use for it there. Hope this helps. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 04:49, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Huh?

How is this disruptive? The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:26, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I rolled back my edit. blah. I am hopeful about that article. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 04:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not, since it's already been rejected at Articles for Creation and he went ahead and created the article anyway. But thanks for the revert. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

St Peters Middle School, Old Windsor

Hi - when closing te AFD for the above school you deleted the old article before creating a redirect. First time I've seen that done. Most closers just edit it to a redirect. I wondered why you did it? I can see no advantage to a deletion/recreation. Have I missed something? Ta Fmph (talk) 10:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

see below --Guerillero | My Talk 19:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Guerillero, you might like to check out this thread on my talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I note that you have closed this AfD debate as a redirect. I wonder if you could possibly review your decision as it seems to have gone against the consensus. It is a very old school dating back to 1725 so there is no problem with lack of sources though the article still needs much work. The article can be found here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St Peter's Middle School, Old Windsor. Another admin has intimated that he would have closed this as a keep. See the discussion at User talk:Kudpung. Dahliarose (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

AfDs are not vote counts. Looking over the members of the discussion this is what I see/saw

• Epeefleche based on the lack of sources thought the article could be either redirected or deleted.
  • (Delete: 1 Redirect: 1 Keep: 0)
• Fmph cited the GNG and thought the article could either be a redirect or deleted
  • (Delete: 2 Redirect: 2 Keep: 0)
• Danjel cited the fact that the article subject won awards as a reason to keep. He brought in no citations to back up his assertion.
  • (Delete: 2 Redirect: 2 Keep: 1)
• Night of the Big Wind pointed out that the article was devoid of sources and without them we can't verify facts. He thought the article should be deleted or redirected.
  • (Delete: 3 Redirect: 3 Keep: 1)
• LuciferWildCat thought the article should be kept because it is a school.
  • I gave this vote no weight. (Delete: 3 Redirect: 2 Keep: 1)
• Purplebackpack thought that the article should be a redirect but didn't give a strong reason.
  • (Delete: 3 Redirect: 4 Keep: 1)
• Dofedave thought that the subject was notable and asserted that it held many awards. He didn't provide any sources.
  • (Delete: 3 Redirect: 4 Keep: 2)
• Dahliarose thought the subject was notable due to its long history and voted keep.
  • (Delete: 3 Redirect: 4 Keep: 3)

That is how I weighed the votes. If I deleted the underlying article before the redirect I am sorry. It is a tick box right beside the close buttons. If you would like the text I will userfy it for you. I stand by my closure. The keep !votes did not provide a policy based reason to keep the article and did not provide any additional citations to back up the article. I have no special feelings about the location of the redirect. If you would like to boldly change it, be my guest. --Guerillero | My Talk 19:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand that the votes that don't give policy reasons don't count and it's not a strict count of votes but the article was, if I recall, substantially altered by the time I voted and sufficient sources had already been provided to prove the notability of the school. The only problem, as I commented, was the copyvio where the contributor had cited an entire paragraph from a source verbatim. I can't access the deleted article now but this page provides details of one of the sources that was cited. It is unprecedented to delete a school article with a 300-year-old history where sources have already been found to prove notability. The earlier votes were also based on the fact that the school was perceived to be a middle school, and of course few such schools can provide good sources. However, middle schools weren't in existence in 1725 and this would have been the only school in the locality catering for all ages for most of its existence. The school would probably only have been given its current name quite recently. In other sources it's simply called St Peter's School or Old Windsor School. Dahliarose (talk) 20:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The time of the vote does not change the weight of the vote. That is one of the facts of life of AfD. I stand by my closure. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:45, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

As part of the closure process do you not look at the actual article as well as looking at the votes? I assumed that would happen which is why I didn't comment about the sources in my vote. By the time I saw the article the case for keeping it seemed overwhelming. The problem now is that a lot of hard work went into creating the article and one of the chief sources used is a book which is not available online. It seems a shame to waste all this hard work, and anyone now wishing to write an article on the school is going to have to start again from scratch. I thought the usual procedure was to retain the article history in the redirect or to put all the useful content in the target article. Can the original article now be undeleted and put back in the redirect or in the Old Windsor article so that all the hard work is not lost? Dahliarose (talk) 10:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)FYI: *redirect - blank, and redirect to Foo where it is already listed. There is no policy or guideline that primary/middle schools are inherently notable, but as redirection is often a preferred solution: Sometimes an unsuitable article may have a title that would make a useful redirect. In these cases, deletion is not required; any user can boldly redirect to another article (policy), non notable schools that are proven to exist are generally not deleted; instead, according to long established precedent demonstrated by 100s of AfD closures, the Notability template: If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted, and summarised in WP:OUTCOMES, an objective essay that "is intended to supplement Wikipedia:Deletion policy", they are redirected to the article about the school district (USA), or to the article about the locality, or to a list article. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I restored the underlying article below the redirect. Dahliarose, if you want to contest my close please open a deletion review. I can not see how a keep consensus can be read from the discussion and I refuse to supervote when closing discussions. I am not sure what you are getting at Kudpung but thanks for reminding me of policy. --Guerillero | My Talk 03:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks. I don't think there's any need for a deletion review. I'll track down a few more references and then restore the article. Dahliarose (talk) 12:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

To restore an article, especially after less then 6 months after the AfD, you will need a DRV. --Guerillero | My Talk 14:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That would depend on the circumstances. WP:CSD#G4 only covers the creation of an "identical and unimproved copy", so if more references and content were added, in an attempt to resolve the issues raised in the AfD, it would not be covered by this criterion. Though saying that, presenting an improved version to DRV first might avoid controversy, particularly so soon after closure. CT Cooper · talk 15:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

It will be an easy matter to create an improved article. The article was nominated for deletion purely because it was deemed to be a "middle school". The nominator and those who voted to delete the article failed to take account of the fact that the school has only been a middle school for the last thirty years or so. Therefore the reason for the nomination and those delete votes were effectively invalid. For most of the school's 300-year history it was a school catering for all the poor children of the parish up until the then school-leaving age. I can't make any sense of the excessively complicated deletion review process. If someone wants to take it up then feel free to do so. The error of policy was really on the part of the nominator who didn't provide proper reasons for deleting the article. Dahliarose (talk) 15:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand your point; it is rather implausible that a 300 year old school is not notable. However, Guerillero has indicated that he is not going to change the result of the AfD, as even if the discussion was flawed, a "supervote" is not appropriate. I think it would be best to try and blow away the concerns of the AfD through presenting an improved article, rather than trying to alter the result. As I have said, I do not think a DRV is strictly necessary, but it can still happen as a safer option. CT Cooper · talk 15:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not au fait with all the policies that govern AfDs but I have seen other schools kept because there was "No consensus". I don't quite understand why that didn't happen in this case, especially as the nominator did not cite any policies in his nomination, merely stating "School through age 13. Appears to be non-notable per wikipedia standards." He clearly didn't make any attempt to check for sources before nominating as he's supposed to have done. There's no policy that says all schools that cater for children under the age of 13 are non-notable. For now I've started to draft out a new article in my sandbox: User:Dahliarose/Sandbox 2. I've found a stack of sources which can be used. I've just included the links in the draft for now as I haven't had much time to incorporate all the material into the article. It's somewhat confusing because the school has had so many different names over the years, and a lot of the books that are showing up on Google Books are understandably not available on the internet. There shouldn't be any problem creating a new and improved article. It's just a pity that in this case a new editor who had tried to improve the article was involved, and he's now not going to come away with a very good impression of the community if his efforts are discouraged by an inappropriate nomination and deletion of the article he has worked on. Dahliarose (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

The more I read into this Christmas crusade of indiscriminate AfD nominations, the more tragic the news I hear. The apparent loss of Dofedave (talk · contribs), who probably had a lot to offer, is very sad, and represents a project wide problem of how we deal with new editors. I simply don't have the time available to help out with the article, but I do wish you luck with your efforts. A school that old could realistically have a GA/FA article, and such an achievement would help show that not all primary schools are non-notable, as is often perceived. CT Cooper · talk 20:29, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I suggest we all take a close look at WP:ROUGH CONSENSUS from Deletion guidelines for administrators, and WP:NSUPER (essay). We all know that Wikipedia debates are not a vote (unless specifically designated a WP:Straw poll). Where inclusion or deletion is clearly covered by a policy or an official guideline, it would be absurd to closed an AfD on a clear consensus that contravenes a clear policy; however, it does happen, and often escapes notice. However, this is not to say that such a closure was made in bad faith or through biased opinion. For anyone not sure what I was getting at, I was merely pointing out, without expressing an opinion, that there are at least three very good sources that clearly suggest that redirection is a preferred solution to simple deletion. As Guerillo has now apparently restored the underlying redirect article, there is in my opinion, no need to take the matter further. There does however seem to be a resulting technical confusion between the left over talk pages, redirects, and histories which I neither have the time, nor competent technical knowledge to untangle - when Dahliarose's new draft is ready for mainspace, it will probably have to be moved over redirect with a history merge, or some such complexity, in order to retain attribution to the original creator and subsequent contributors. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

(Sorry I had to take a break) I will do the history merge if a well source article is put to my attention --Guerillero | My Talk 04:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Lets give this a time stamp --Guerillero | My Talk 04:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Butt Sock

FYI, you didn't enter the reason for deletion here. Calabe1992 05:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed --Guerillero | My Talk 05:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Korea Development Bank FC

Why did you delete article about Korea Development Bank FC? This artcle have references and don't have any reason to delete. Please explain reason in detail. If you deletion is right, so many football club article also deleted. User Cloudz679 did attach deletion tag, when I created new article, He is stoking article that I created and he is idiot. Please explain deletion reason and revive article.Temwikier (talk) 08:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the article because it is word for word what was deleted under this discussion. Please remember to stay civil and refrain from personal attacks. cheers --In actu (Guerillero) | My Talk 14:12, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

PT LAUTAN LUAS Tbk

PT LAUTAN LUAS Tbk (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

May I know the reason why you deleted my page (PT LAUTAN LUAS Tbk)? and may I know what words should be avoided for not promoting unambiguous advertising? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ltls51 (talk • contribs) 08:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I will look back at the article --Guerillero | My Talk 03:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

The article read like an advertisement one would see on a company's website. It has less to do with words and more to do with tone. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Guerillero. I don't really understand what "It has less to do with words and more to do with tone" means. Could you specify that sentence? Anyway, the purpose we (Lautan Luas company) publish the article is just to introduce the PT LAUTAN LUAS Tbk through wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ltls51 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I look at the tone of the article and if it is promotional as a whole with no salvageable WP:NPOV content, I will delete it --Guerillero | My Talk 04:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you give a specific example so that I could easily understand? I still don't get it. So sorry Guerillero. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ltls51 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Guerillero. You have new messages at Mabdul's talk page.
Message added 03:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

mabdul 03:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Removal of Citations?

Hi:

Re Citations. On the Article Al Gordon I noticed a citation. I found a solicitation that provided the information needed for citation.

I researched it here at Wiki and thought i was doing it right... but after I cited the info needed to substantiate the claim the citation was about on the Talk Page... and then removed the citation weeks later, someone put the citation back saying "do not remove citation requests. That is not how Wikipedia works."

I thought I did it correctly. Can you help me do it right?

Thanx! Albabe (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I am disengaging from this dispute --Guerillero | My Talk 01:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

• News and notes: SOPA blackout, Orange partnership

• In the news: World watched as Wikipedia shut down for SOPA blackout

• WikiProject report: The Golden Horseshoe: WikiProject Toronto

• Featured content: Interview with Muhammad Mahdi Karim and the best of the week

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Muhammad images, AUSC call for applications

• Technology report: Looking ahead to MediaWiki 1.19 and related issues

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 18:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Balmer Lawrie

Care to say what the "assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7" is? Can't say I'm surprised it was denied as there's certainly some puffery there. When I tagged it I was thinking it would probably depend on what admin I got. That said I'd still be interested in what you thought the assertion was. Dpmuk (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

As an aside, when you use CSDH is it still manual, do you still click save yourself? I hate those decline messages as I think the boldness is totally unnecessary. As it's javascript, rather than a bot, I'm assuming I can't opt out so am thinking of leaving an edit notice saying I don't want them - I have a watch list after all. Dpmuk (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The thing that pushed me over is the fact that the company is owned by the nation of India and the fact that it has been around since the mid 1800s. There has to be sources about it out there. As for the notices, they are a wash. Some people love them, while others hate them. I have to remember every time to not send one and sometimes it slips my mind. Per DTTR, I will try my hardest not to send them to you. (FYI a talk page notice wouldn't work because I never see your talk page when leaving them) cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 17:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, that's a good point, I'd actually missed the year it had been created. I may well not have tagged myself if I'd seen that. And thanks for the info on CSDH, I'll just have to carry on debolding the text on the rare occasions I get them. Dpmuk (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

DRV

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I voted --Guerillero | My Talk 17:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Babu Banarasi Das University

Hi there. Can I please know what this page pointed to before it was removed? I was surprised to find a red link on List of universities in India and I may wish to rectify that, but can't if I don't know what was wrong with the article in the first place. --Muhandes (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

The redirect went here. It was CSDed under G11 --Guerillero | My Talk 17:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess it was quite an old article which someone caught up with, I'll rewrite it when I have the time. --Muhandes (talk) 22:43, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ

A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Recent Deletion

David Bushmich (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Guerillero - I'm new to creating pages, and I understand the guidelines, but you recently deleted an entry I'm working on, and I was hoping maybe you can assist with this on the technical level. You see, I have some reference material, most of which is in Russian, and I don't even know how to redirect pages to the Russian wiki pages to tie it all together. Can you maybe check out the following links and tell me how best to go about fixing this?

David Bushmich was my grandfather, his Jewish name probably was the sole reason why his female co-worker and not him took over the institute when Filatov left in mid-1900's and here he is in a photograph with the director of the Filatov Institute, his female colleague, in 1971:

http://www.profimedia.rs/fotografie/ukrainian-v-filatov-research-institute-of-eye-diseases/0077431020/

Here is the page I screwed up the "see also" section on when attempting to add my grandfather and his female colleague:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Filatov#See_also

Here's a page with some publications and studies done by David Bushmich and his colleagues:

http://irbis.rmbic.ru/cgi-bin/irbis64r_91/cgiirbis_64.exe?Z21ID=&I21DBN=IBIS&P21DBN=IBIS&S21STN=1&S21REF=&S21FMT=&C21COM=S&S21CNR=20&S21P01=0&S21P02=0&S21P03=S=&S21STR=%D0%A0%D0%9E%D0%93%D0%9E%D0%92%D0%98%D0%A6%D0%AB%20%D0%A2%D0%A0%D0%90%D0%9D%D0%A1%D0%9F%D0%9B%D0%90%D0%9D%D0%A2%D0%90%D0%A6%D0%98%D0%AF%20--%20CORNEAL%20TRANSPLANTATION

Here's the Russian page for the Filatov Institute will all applicable links except David Bushmich, but all this is in Russian, the the English versions are not as complete:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F,_%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B0_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0

I know this is asking a lot, but maybe you can at least help me fix what little I changed on the Filatov - the man - page, and add something substantiated to my grandfather's page that will not get deleted?

Chepusov (talk) 06:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)Chepusov

I suggest you draft your article in your userspace then move it to the mainspace. English article can not redirect to russian articles; but english translations are accepted. I would help, but I am too burnt out right now. Remember that he has to pass WP:SCHOLAR to be included. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 21:05, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

BeatleForum.com (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Guerillero,

You deleted the page I created for BeatleForum.com just seconds after it was created. BeatlesForum.com is one of the most popular sources of Beatles related information and is a destination for fans all over the world wishing to communicate about the group. It is the #1 seach result when using Google to search for Beatles related forums. I feel your decision to delete this entry just seconds after it was created was premature & reckless. Please undo your deletion. If you require additional documentation fine. Ask.

playserious — Preceding unsigned comment added by Playserious (talk • contribs) 23:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Per the speedy deletion criteria, articles about webpages can be deleted. The article about Beatlesforum.com did not make an claims of why it is important. Search rankings don't cut it. Has the forum ever been covered by a mainstream news source? --Guerillero | My Talk 23:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Arbitration Committee clerk team

I have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C#clerks-l). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at mail:clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is clerks-llists.wikimedia.org. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.

New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C#List of clerks, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.

Lastly, it might be useful if you enter your timezone into WP:AC/C#List of clerks (in the same format as the other members have), so that we can estimate when we will have clerks available each day; this is, of course, at your discretion. Again, welcome! Regards, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 23:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

May god have mercy on your soul. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hehe. Thank you sven --Guerillero | My Talk 01:23, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

+1 to what Sven said. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 01:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

• News and notes: Update on Global Development, Wikipedia Day NYC is a success, JFK audio on Commons

• In the news: Zambian wiki-assassins, Foundation über alles, editor engagement and the innovation plateau

• Recent research: Language analyses examine power structure and political slant; Wikipedia compared to commercial databases

• WikiProject report: Digging Up WikiProject Palaeontology

• Featured content: Featured content soaring this week

• Arbitration report: Five open cases, voting on proposed decisions in two cases

• Technology report: Why "Lua" is on everybody's lips, and when to expect MediaWiki 1.19

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

IRC

hello Guerillero/Archives/2012/January want to be on IRC as I can not say. Greetings and thanks--BrunoHe (talk) 14:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are trying to tell me. I have class in 15 minutes then work. --Guerillero | My Talk 14:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)