User talk:Peridon/Archives/2013/February

Kalamazoo Outdoor Gourmet

That was real fast (that's why they call it "speedy") deletion. Despite being contested. Where's the fire? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

"Kalamazoo Outdoor Gourmet™ Debuts New Hybrid Fire Grills; Only Gas Grills Capable of Cooking With Charcoal and Wood". PRWEB. April 26, 2011. Retrieved February 1, 2012. {{cite web}}: Text "locationLas Vegas, NV" ignored (help)

Kalamazoo Outdoor Gourmet™, the leading manufacturer of high-end outdoor kitchen equipment, introduced today the only barbeques that cook with three different fuels at once: wood, charcoal and gas. These unique grills provide the widest cooking versatility on the market, giving their owners the freedom to pursue any outdoor cooking technique they desire — using the fuel of their choice. Kalamazoo Outdoor Gourmet Hybrid Fire Grills are the only barbeques that can cook with gas, charcoal and wood - all at the same time.

"Hybrid Fire Grilling System drawers, located above the gas burners and below the cooking surface, make it possible for these powerful grills to use any combination of gas, wood or charcoal."

This was on line, but you couldn't wait?

The fire's under the grill... It was up for an hour or so. I've advised the author on how to proceed as well. An earlier version was deleted for spam, by the way. PRWeb is not a reliable independent source, by the way. It's a press release service, and that one is pure advertising. Peridon (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Peridon. You have new messages at WilliamJE's talk page.
Message added 20:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

...William 20:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Any specific reason you deleted our company's page? OnWire Consulting Group? I wasn't even done putting all the information on the page when you deleted it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tblamb2you2 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Garrett Green

Ok sure. Thanks. I knew nothing about it tbh, I just thought it was a waste of a page. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 02:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Vladimir Pasjoukov (Pasyoukov)

Dear Peridon about two weeks ago you were kind enough to help me with an article and thanks again! just one little favour to ask of you could you please rename the article Vladimir Pasjoukov to Vladimir Pasyoukov cause apparently it's spelt with a y!

Thanks! --Cormag100 (talk) 16:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. I've left the j spelling as a redirect. Peridon (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast! Thanks again :D--Cormag100 (talk) 17:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

• Special report: Examining the popularity of Wikipedia articles

• News and notes: Article Feedback Tool faces community resistance

• WikiProject report: Land of the Midnight Sun

• Featured content: Portal people on potent potables and portable potholes

• In the media: Star Trek Into Pedantry

• Technology report: Wikidata team targets English Wikipedia deployment

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 01:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

regarding your comment at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cubana Bar Restaurant

This isn't related in a Wikipedia way to your comment there, but in a worldly way. A sure way to get me not to stay at a motel is to put on your reader board "Clean Rooms". Really? Does the owner think I might accidentally choose a place that has dirty rooms? I mean, c'mon...why don't you just put on your reader board "Our rooms have walls"? Clean rooms are a minimum standard. You might as well just say, "We are completely mediocre". Sorry if you consider this a waste of your time, but it just felt right to share. Thanks, BTW, for everything you do around here. You always seem to be a light of reason in whatever you are involved in. Happy editing! Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. (dries eyes and sniffs loudly...) In Bradford on Avon, I once saw a pub that on its board advertised something like "lousy atmosphere" "poor food" and "bad beer" (I can't remember the actual adjectives, but those give the idea...). I was very tempted. Unfortunately, I was driving through to another town where I had a meeting with someone and couldn't spare the time to sober up afterwards. I did see an article (now deleted) that was so full of buzz words that, while I was absolutely certain that it was advertising, I had no idea whatever of what the company actually did. I told the author so, too, and probably suggested getting a life outside the PR department once in a while. Wish I'd kept a copy somewhere. I don't mind change in language, but why do people use the estate agent's 'garage to rear' instead of the more accurate and correct 'garage at rear'. To? It's not going anywhere unless the cliff edge has moved closer again... And all this other PR crap... Peridon (talk) 11:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

STOREPET : Deleted article

I would like to write an article about the European project STOREPET. But the previous page was deleted by you. The intend of editing that article is not the promotion of any company or product. The main goal is to provide knowledge to all stakeholders in the building materials sector: researches, students, builders..etc. If you agree, I can write the article again without mentioning any company or research center. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pazrz (talk • contribs) 15:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay - there's no objection whatever to you writing a new article. (There would be loud objections to you writing the same article...) For information, you only have to ask permission if a page cannot be created - that is, if it's 'protected from creation'. This is a thing that admins can do to block a title, usually because it's repeatedly put back up, or because there's something objectionable involved in it. First, please read WP:COI as I'm sure you are not just a kind passer-by who has somehow heard of the stuff. (Yes, I am a cynic...) Then read WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV, together with WP:RS. Then create it at User:Pazrz/DRAFT (just click and save). Keep it much shorter than the previous one. Start with just the basics. Watch the NPOV - even in user space it can be tagged if it's looking promo. Then expand where needed. Ask advice from User:MelanieN and/or User:Tokyogirl79 who are good rescuers. Oh yes, your goal should be to provide neutral information for Wikipedia users (who can be builders or nuclear physicists or retired nurses), so keep it readable. Remember this is an encyclopaedia, not a technical manual... Peridon (talk) 17:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

regarding your comment for Doub's Mill

I did not intend Doub's Mill to be an article. I thought I was in a sandbox and I agree that it should be deleted as an article. I am a novice on Wikpedia and trying to understand how to navigate around. Have I responded to the correct person in a correct manner. Thanks Perinll1 (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

It's in your userspace now if you want to play with it in safety.If you don't really want it, put {{db-u1}} (those are curly brackets) at the top and that will list it for deletion. (U1 is for pages in your user space). To create user space pages (safest way of creating articles...), just type User:Perinll1/choose a title on your user page and then click preview. Click on the new red link, and you create the page. Don't copy and paste from other sites until you've found out about copyright. A good place to ask questions is the Teahouse WP:TEAHOUSE. A good thing to read is the Primer WP:PRIMER. Hope you enjoy it here. It can get very complicated if you let it, but always feel free to ask people why they did or said something. Heck, I still ask people how to do things and I'm an admin! Peridon (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of RDGLDGRN (notability not proven)

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. My page on the up and coming band RDGLDGRN was deleted because I did not adequately demonstrate that RDGLDGRN is important or significant. I fully understand that I failed to elaborate on details regarding their rise in popularity and their musical career. I had included references from Rolling Stone and others but somehow the references were lost when I clicked "Save page" - I should have worked harder to ensure those references be known. Could I have the deleted page RDGLDGRN moved into my sandbox such that I could elaborate on their history (particularly the role of Dave Grohl in playing drums on the entire album and Pharrell Williams on one song in the album. I am expertly informed on this topic and would like to share the information. Thank you again for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariabeegold (talk • contribs) 13:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Please sign talk page posts with ~~~~ - it puts your sig and the time stamp on. Your article is now at User:Mariabeegold/RDGLDGRN. Please remember that even though you may be an expert, we require reliable independent sources WP:RS to prove the notability WP:BAND. If you want help, User:MelanieN and User:Tokyogirl79 are good at rescuing things and getting things up to standard. Referencing isn't always easy, but they are both good at digging things out. I've seen a piece of pure spam about something I didn't think notable turned into a sound article... Peridon (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Help!

Hi, Peridon! I need some advice. I want to report a user for tendentious editing over a period of many years. A year ago he was taken to AN and threatened with a topic ban; the proposal was "suspended" after he promised to change his editing style, but he hasn't. He was also warned at an unrelated ArbCom case. I and many other editors have asked him to tone down his agressive, long-winded, argumentative style; he dismisses all such comments, even after I specifically reminded him of his promises under threat of a topic ban.

Encouraged by another user, I am on the verge of taking him to the community for a possible topic ban or other solution. My question to you is, what is the appropriate forum? I don't hang out in the "drama areas" so I'm not familiar with the right place for such things. Should it go to AN, AN/I, or RFC/U?

I have written up a long, detailed summary of the situation over multiple discussions with plenty of diffs. I was going to take it to AN/I since that is the only place I am familiar with for such things. However, this is not about an "incident", it is a pattern of problems. I note that his earlier topic ban threat came at AN rather than AN/I (it was actually a followup to an administrator who had posted in AN saying they were giving up their mop in frustration over the badgering from this person). One of the recommendations at that closure was that the user should be taken to RFC/U if problems persist. I had a look at RFC/U and was appalled. It seems to be incredibly formal, and despite all its formal trappings it doesn't seem to be able to enforce any result. But it seems to be the recommended place to take cases of chronic tendentious editing.

I deliberately haven't given you any specifics here, I just want your advice about the proper forum for this kind of situation. Or if you aren't familiar with the drama pages either, maybe you could tell me who to ask. Please reply here on your talk page. Thanks for any advice! --MelanieN (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not impressed by RFC/U either, and on the whole keep out of the drama areas. (I just stir things up once in a while with an off the wall suggestion or comment...) I'd suggest giving an outline at AN asking where you should go with it, or perhaps better try asking Boing! said Zebedee or JamesBWatson. They're in there more than I am, and I've always found them fair minded and they seem to know their way around. Or there's Drmies and Dennis Brown over on your side of the pond. I can't see any of then being unwilling to help. Good luck, and sorry I can't be more use. I'll keep a look out. Peridon (talk) 17:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I had a feeling drama wasn't your cup of tea. It isn't mine either, but something needs to be done here - and at least one other person agrees. --MelanieN (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again. I got helpful advice from Boing (did you know he is not an admin any more?) and one of his talk page stalkers, and also from JBW. They all advised AN and that is where I wound up going: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive245#Continued tendentious editing by Born2cycle. We'll see how it goes. --MelanieN (talk) 15:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Delete userpage

Thanks for taking care of the deletion. Perhaps you can delete User:Skizzik/monobook.js too? --Skizzik^talk 14:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Peridon (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --Skizzik^talk 15:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

You were mentioned in a rant

You were mentioned in a rant at Wikipedia:Help desk#Complaint of Abuse. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Eidikous

Hi,

This has reference to deletion of the article Eidikous - Changing the face of Contract Management in India. Please note, Eidikous is just a term used for Specialists and the Contract Managers are specialists of their field. The article is not aimed at prompting any company but a group which is not linked and not known to each other. The article was aimed at creating the awareness of changing faces over a period of time and the way things have changed in the past to the present and what lies in future. If you are using just the keywords, you are mistaken. I leave it to your judgment as deaf ears don't listen!!!

Regards Saraf.vikram (talk) 03:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Advertising isn't just confined to companies. It can apply to ideas, religions, neologisms, or anything. This read as a promotion for a system. It may have been your intention to write a neutral article on this, but it came over as promotion. Please read WP:NPOV about neutral point of view, and remember that encyclopaedia articles should not sound as if they are straight from a PR department. Please read also WP:RS about the reliable independent sources needed to prove that this is a notable subject. A Google search for '"Eidikous" contract management' gave three hits, none of which appeared relevant. Peridon (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

There can be no substitute to suspicion based on ones judgment. As I said, it was aimed for creating the awareness of the changing face of the working System in a country and term coined by the folks here which will, in due course of time, generate the buzz. As I said, deaf ears don't listen!!! but when someone is judgmental the hearing gets biased as well. Thanks!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saraf.vikram (talk • contribs) 07:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Flights With Friends

Hi Peridon. I noticed that you recently deleted the article, Flights With Friends, with the rationale being because it does not make an assertion of importance. Well, deleting the page probably would have been appropriate, but not right now. It did actually make an assertion of importance, and I had recently nominated it for deletion due to lack of notability; the debate should probably still continue as lack of assertion and notability are two seperate things and, as I said, the page still does pass the former. In my opinion, I would have like the debate complete first. TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 21:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted the page while I was still editing it based on the feedback in the discussion. There are significant sources for the page, and I was editing the notability. Ilanacal (talk) 21:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC)ilanacal

OK, I've restored and re-opened. Ilanacal, please see my note on your page about references. Peridon (talk) 21:24, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

• Op-ed: An article is a construct – hoaxes and Wikipedia

• Featured content: A lousy week

• WikiProject report: Just the Facts

• In the media: Wikipedia mirroring life in island ownership dispute

• News and notes: UK chapter governance review marks the end of a controversial year

• Discussion report: WebCite proposal

• Technology report: Wikidata client rollout stutters

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 07:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Kevalchacha

Could you delete the userpage/remove content from the userpage since the user is violating it by writing article to the userpage. Thanks. Torreslfchero (talk) 12:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Can't really get them for that unless it's attack, spam, copyvio or hoax. Has to be up for a bit for WP:FAKEARTICLE to apply. See how it goes. I've just deleted something similar in article space. Peridon (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I will keep that in mind before reporting to an admin or tagging it. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

DF Markets deletion

Hi. Thanks for your feedback. I do respect and understand some of your remarks. However, I am a bit confused about the deletion as I used some of already existing similar articles as a guideline. By similar, I mean Wikipedia pages of companies operating in the same business field and I assumed the way they are written and the fact that they are present in Wikipedia signal for approval by administrators. As you already know, this was my first article and as such I searched for similar subjects/companies to see how they are written/referenced etc, in addition to the main guidelines provided by Wikipedia. For example, one of these pages belongs to Alpari. I think I did not do anything much different of what has already been done in terms of writing about a similar company, please correct me if I am wrong. FinancialArticles (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. (That's the polite link...) There is no signal of approval from admins. We don't work like that. Articles appear, and the various patrollers (New Page, Recent Edits, my old stamping ground Edits by New Accounts, Random Pages, and even Googling "Wikipedia" with certain key words like 'offers', 'exclusive', 'we' and so on) look at what comes their way and either tag it of ignore it. If they mark it reviewed, others who are cynical will look at it again... Speedy tagged articles are looked at, sometimes by other patrollers (who can detag) or by admins (who can delete or detag). In other words, their are signals for dis-approval, but not for approval. Any article can get tagged if appropriate - even after four or five years. Articles for Creation gives a thumbs up by launching an article into main space, but even then the patrollers can tag it. Wikipedia won't reach its final fixed state until the last editor on the ground has finished the article about Gabriel blowing the trumpet... Look again at those articles. (Alpari's not a good example. I've just proposed deletion as none of the references are any good.) You need to have sound independent coverage. Not "also in this line of business are BloggsCo, Synthetic Hamster Corp and..." or brief profiles. Not many people bother about stock brokers when they are behaving properly. Companies in some lines of business just don't get widespread discussion. Unfair? Maybe. We have to draw lines somewhere, or we'd end up with an article about the chap selling roses at the traffic lights.... Read CORP and RS and look at articles about bigger better known names. I can't think of any, and I've lost touch with the only stock broker in my family (and don't use one myself). Peridon (talk) 18:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Samba de amigo maneom

Hello, yesterday I CSD'd this article under A7. Looking closer at WP:CSD#A7 I see not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works so I understand why you removed it and PROD'd it. It still seems to lack notability to the extent to the point where I don't see it not being deleted. Is there any other relevant CSD criteria or is it a case of PRODing/AfDing it? Cheers, Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 09:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Basically, no, there's no CSD for it. It's not spam in appearance - if it does exist, yes, of course this is intended to get it known, but it isn't promotional in tone. It's not an attack, or insofar as I can see a copyvio. CSD is limited. A7 is people, groups of people including churches and companies but usually not schools etc), named animals (not species), web content (that is, if you use it on their computer, yes it's A7, but if you use it on yours, no, it's a product, and recently we've got organised events in there too. Anything else is prod and often then AfD. Or if it's a border line case, straight to AfD for consensus. Albums by non-blue linked performers are A9 unless they show significance of their own (like a football fan club hitting number one). But with those, check that the black name or red link is correct - A quick Google of the name with Wikipedia will show if there is really an article, and you can then correct the link. CSD is a short cut for admins to get rid of certain obvious cases. Prod and AfD are the 'normal' procedure... Peridon (talk) 18:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks. As an aside, I noticed you userfied a page earlier, Nitram Charcoal, when you moved it I think you may have left an articlespace-->userspace redirect by accident. I've tagged it with R2 Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 20:41, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I left it on purpose. New editors forget to sign in, and if they see their article is gone, and they don't get the yellow ribbon of 'here's a message', they will just go away and never know that it's been moved. At least, that's what I think happens. They might decide it's not worth the effort. This is why I give the names of two experienced rescuers and referencers (see User talk:Christina119) who are willing to help newcomers. If I think it's just promo with no hope, or the newbie starts telling me my job (or even trying to get me sacked!), I don't. Peridon (talk) 20:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Llandegfan Antelope FC

Hi, I note you have decided to delete the page I have created regarding Llandegfan Antelope FC. I would be most grateful if you could please reinstate the page, as this page was not yet finished. As you may be able to tell from the dates and times of page edits, it is very much a "work-in-progress". The Anglesey League is the sixth tier of the Welsh football league system and it is my intention to add information regarding the other Clubs playing in the League,given that there is sufficient interest in the League, but not many resources regarding the individual Clubs. I am local to the area, attend countless matches and consider myself an expert in this field. You will note that there are already pages regarding other Clubs in the League, but these are far less detailed than mine. Sonaefc (talk) 14:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)sonaefc

If it goes straight into article space, it's likely to be deleted again. You need to show that the club is notable (that's notable by our definition of the word). Look at WP:GROUP and WP:RS (reliable independent sources). I'm not sure if there is a specific policy for football clubs - the one for footballers insists on professional status or playing for a national side. That there are articles for other clubs doesn't matter - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. They may show a notability that you didn't, or just have slipped through the net. In fact, only one team in your league has it's own article - the other two blue-linked ones are reserve teams of clubs with articles. Those articles date back to when our policies were not as strict. See if you can find references. If you can, I'll restore the article into your user space for finishing. If there are no references, there's no point. (The patrolling system is vastly different now to what it was back in 2007 and earlier.) Peridon (talk) 16:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, that's great, thank you. Your comments in respect of previously existing articles is duly noted and I will add references (I have a couple of different sources) to this article and will demonstrate the 'notability' of the Football Club in question. This particular Club has an interesting story given it was the merging of two Clubs, one of which has great history in Welsh football. This was due to be emphasised in my additions to the article, but when I went to do that today, it was gone! Where will I be able to access the piece to add the relevant parts? Many thanks. Sonaefc (talk) 17:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

It's now at User:Sonaefc/Llandegfan Antelope FC. If you want help and/or reference digging or such, User:MelanieN and User:Tokyogirl79 are two editors I recommend people to consult. Good at digging and wording, and enjoy a challenge. Peridon (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello Peridon, I have tried to help him on his talk page. <Cauvi mode on> Please don't send users with questions about European football to US-girls. Their Soccer League Systems differ to much from the European ones.</Cauvi mode off>--Ben Ben (talk) 18:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Want to join the team? I'd be happy to add you to the rescuers list. Peridon (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Me on that list? Thanks, but ooh no ... . I'm a stubborn deletionist! I only help/rescue if it is about football, a pretty girl or something so obscure that it was fun to learn about it ;) And all other things new to me ... . To say the truth, I'm here to practice my English language skills, rescuing or even writing articles isn't fully included in these skills.--Ben Ben (talk) 20:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help on this Peridon and Ben. I've now edited and added references to the page in question; perhaps you could take a look and let me know if this is sufficient? Thanks in advance. --Sonaefc (talk) 21:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Not sure about the pitcheroo pages - those look like a club site hosting. Can you get a non-blog from the Post or the Echo? That would be better than the local Anglesey online one. Blogs don't count for notability, nor do own pages. I'd suggest asking User:Boing! said Zebedee or User:JamesBWatson for an opinion. With football, I can tell when something is definitely not showing notability, but I'm not always sure if it is when it appears to be. (I know what I mean there...) Peridon (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

DF Markets

Thanks for your feedback and explanation.FinancialArticles (talk) 14:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

When walking along a contour line.

Loved your comment about walking along a contour line. Hope I'd have had the sense to say If your contour line goes up and down hill, either you are on the wrong hill or there has been a major Earthquake. ϢereSpielChequers 15:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

	Protector of Music
	Hereby is Peridon awarded this trophy for his outstanding achievement and help with the article Vladimir Pasyoukov. Feeling proud of you my dear friend and I hope there will be many success stories to come! Heartiest congratulations! Cormag100 Cormag100 (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

• WikiProject report: Thank you for flying WikiProject Airlines

• Technology report: Better templates and 3D buildings

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation declares 'victory' in Wikivoyage lawsuit

• In the media: Sue Gardner interviewed by the Australian press

• Featured content: Featured content gets schooled

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Page Ostrow, etc.

I notice that you recently cleared this user's page as promotional. I noticed that the same person that created this page has apparently also created User:Ostrow Page and User:Ostrow and Comp, all focused on the same subject. Do such obvious ducks need an SPI? I'm not certain some days. Thanks. (Update: User:‎INeverCry just cleared and blocked User:Ostrow and Comp) --| Uncle Milty | talk | 20:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I think I'll go duck hunting. Thanks. Peridon (talk) 21:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Blocked a sock (and put a note on the oother - already blocked) and warned the master account. Keep an eye out - looks persistent. Peridon (talk) 21:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I re-blocked User:Ostrow and Comp here and replaced the soft message with a sock tag. I also hard-blocked the User:Ostrow and Comp account on Commons, deleted 2 promo images, and warned the User:Ostrow Page account there. INeverCry 21:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Nice one. Peridon (talk) 21:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hi. I've have put a question on my Talk-page. --Jonassoeby (talk) 17:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

2013 World Tour

2013 World Tour does not disambiguate anything. You could add any "World Tour" in 2013 there. That's what we have categories for.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 17:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

That's as may be. That CSD criterion specifies two or fewer items. This has three, and escapes CSD. It'll have to be prod or AfD. Peridon (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 15:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Unblocking problem

Hey this is Skyler,

below is the message i've recieved

When I try to upload any images this is what comes up Information for blocked users You can contact Yann or another administrator (list) to contest the block. You cannot use the email this user feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences, has been confirmed, and you are not disallowed from using it while blocked. Your current IP address is 69.124.242.137 and the block ID is #118378. Please include this in any queries! Blocked users can edit their own user talk page, unless specifically disallowed from doing so. If you are not logged in as a registered user, use the talk page for your IP address. You can add {{unblock}} to your user talk page to request unblocking. If the block reason seems unrelated to you, it is possible you were affected by a software feature known as the autoblock. In that case, contact an administrator and they will do their best to remove the autoblock. Please note that, for technical reasons, removing the autoblock is not always possible. In such cases, you may need to wait 24 hours for the autoblock to expire.

Answered at the poster's talk page. Peridon (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

• In the media: Ex-WMF trustee creates "Wikipedia Corporate Index" for PR agency

• Recent research: Wikipedia not so novel after all, except to UK university lecturers

• News and notes: "Very lucky" Picture of the Year

• Discussion report: Wikivoyage links; overcategorization

• Featured content: Blue birds be bouncin'

• WikiProject report: How to measure a WikiProject's workload

• Technology report: Wikidata development to be continued indefinitely

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)