User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 6

By the way...

I meant what I said - I think you'll be an excellent admin and a (further) credit to the project with the tools. I'm sorry that your RfA has contained an unfortunate element of free-floating animosity - you deserve better than that. Anyhow, best of luck. :) MastCell ^Talk 20:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Seconded. I reviewed a few hundred of your contributions when I saw your name pop up on Template:Admin dashboard, and for the most part they show an editor I would support for the mop'n'bucket in a heartbeat. You sometimes emphasize different aspects of a situation than I would, but your reasoning is solid and I trust you to find a good solution for whatever the site throws at you. Feel free to stop by for a chat any time. Your answer to MONGO really cinched the deal. That page is I think the ugliest RfA I have ever participated in, and I wish it had not happened to someone I basically respect. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request_to_amend_prior_case:_Climate_Change

The above concerns you directly. Hipocrite (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--SPhilbrickT 01:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Requests for Feedback: Gemma Gibbons

Hi Sphilbrick, cheers for the feedback on the Gemma Gibbons article, much appreciated. I'm more than happy to dip my toes in at the Feedback page, but I am very much a part-time Wikipedian (The time taken to accumulate my current edit count suggests as much) so I'm not terribly sharp on all of the guidelines, policies and styles etc. - That said, I can offer tips and advice to articles creators along the lines of the feedback I left the other day, and I'm very happy to do so where possible. Thanks again Darigan (talk) 09:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject CT Autumn Photo Contest

Hi Sphilbrick! I've (finally) gotten through all of your submissions! However, there are some problems in your tally and at this point it's really close. Currently you stand at 108 valid submission vs 114 for Emporostheoros. Could you please double check these? As far as I can tell, barring the first one the rest seem to be "double counts" where a photo was counted in more than one article. Thanks, Markvs88 (talk) 21:07, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• Connecticut Huskies women's basketball (1) - public domain picture from White House.
• National Register of Historic Places listings in Hartford County, Connecticut (25 added 5 counted) - pictures counted in another article.
• National Register of Historic Places listings in Litchfield County, Connecticut (6 added 5 counted) - pictures counted in another article.
• National Register of Historic Places listings in Southington, Connecticut (8 added 5 counted) - pictures counted in another article.
• National Register of Historic Places listings in Tolland County, Connecticut (7 added 5 counted) - pictures counted in another article.
• Diana Taurasi (1) - picture counted in another article.
• Ezekiel Phelps House (1) - - picture counted in another article.
• List of Connecticut state parks (1) - picture counted in another article.
• McLean Game Refuge (1) - picture counted in another article.
• Oliver Filley House (1) - picture counted in another article.
• Oliver White Tavern (1) - picture counted in another article.
• Southington, Connecticut (2) - pictures counted in another article.

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		Congratulations to Sphilbrick! You took Second Place by adding 108 images to the Connecticut WikiProject during the Autumn 2010 Photo Contest! Great work!! Markvs88 (talk) 17:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

A 'crat beating the 'crat gratz

Congratulations, Sphilbrick, on receiving the toolbox. I must thank you for 1) allowing me to nominate you and 2) for amply demonstrating the qualities I know you have during this RfA. You comported yourself with honor and dignity in the face of what was a very trying week, and I'm certain you will continue to demonstrate these qualities as a wiki admin. Congratulations again! Now AfD is thataway, get cracking! -- Avi (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Congratulation. I wish you well. - jc37 18:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

RfA success

Congratulations! —Deckiller (t-c-l) 18:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Ditto! --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:47, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 18:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations Sphilbrick!! Markvs88 (talk) 18:59, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! I was particularly impressed by your restraint throughout the chaos of RfA. Use the tools well! PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 19:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations. Tiderolls 19:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats! --j⚛e decker^talk 19:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. --Abd (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Don't fuck up. -Atmoz (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats, and what Atmoz said. Horologium (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats! --Kudpung (talk) 19:59, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulatory spam Sven Manguard _Talk 20:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• You'll be a great admin. Anyone who kept his/her cool through that RfA the way you did will be fine. Congratulations. :) MastCell ^Talk 21:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• I'm sure you'll do a fine job. Congratulations! The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 23:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 02:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
• I've been on Wikibreak and missed the chance to support you! Count me as an accessory after the fact - congratulations; I'm sure you'll do a sterling job. Gonzonoir (talk) 14:54, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. If you have any questions about your shiny new buttons, feel free to drop me a line. TNXMan 17:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. I hate to be terse, but do not make me regret supporting you. Thank you. Vodello (talk) 04:36, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Summary of my reactions to RfA

I've noticed that some candidates send out a message to all who participated in their RfA, thanking them for taking the time. I considered doing that, but rejected it. At some time in the future, I may be in a position to contemplate an admin action involving someone who participated, and I don't want to be in the position of being swayed in any way by the position they took at their RfA, so I'd just as soon avoid taking actions that might help me remember who supported and who did not.

That said, there were a number of things said at the RfA that will be useful guides for the future. I am summarizing some of the highlights here, specifically without names attached. My intention is to address the shortcomings identified, while forgetting who specifically mentioned each item.

Before going into the specifics, I was mortified to see how much drama I caused. I share the concerns of those who think that some discussions get overly dramatic. Sometimes it cannot be avoided, but it should be minimized, and I'm quite sorry to have inadvertently been a part of it. I missed a couple things, and plan to learn from them. My biggest miss was not anticipating that some editors might not be permitted to speak their minds. I wish I had anticipated it, and at least attempted a solution in advance.

Specifics:

• Clarity is important—I made some statements that were misunderstood by some readers, and I can see how they reached their conclusion. I have a bad habit of occasionally saying something provocative for the purpose of starting a conversation, which is fine in some circumstances, but when trying to make a point, I should strive for clarity, not inscrutability.
• Neutrality—When I see several editors disagreeing with a single editors, the odds are high that the several editors are right, but not 100%. I have a "support the underdog" mentality, so I try to put myself in the shoes of the minority view, to see if there is any merit to it. While I have no plans to change this approach in general, as I think it is valuable to help ensure that sheer numbers do not sway result, I have to be careful not to go so far overboard in the opposite direction that I become part of the problem. If I fail to acknowledge to good points of the majority, I risk being viewed as simply a fringe supporter. I've strived to do this, but can do better.
• AGF—I'm fairly good at this, but it never hurts to keep working on this. I over-reacted to someone accusing me (IMO unfairly), and eventually it turned out to me a misunderstanding, which might have been totally avoided had I worked harder on clarity, as my imperfect wording lead to a problem. That said, another person's failure to AGF is not license for me to abandon AGF.
• Protection—I've obviously never protected an article, but I've also been virtually absent at RFPP. I had some notion of how I would go about it, but it was pointed out that my assumptions were wrong. I think I have a better understanding now, but I will be very slow to use the tool, as it isn't yet an area of strength.
• Principled—I am happy to be able to point to examples where I have expressed support for someone who I've tangled with, but I am weaker at principled opposition to someone I consider a friend. I'm aware that this is one of the oft-stated concerns about admins, so I'll strive to do better.
• GAN,FAC—I have a decent amount of content, but very deficient when it comes to the very best of our articles. I'm frankly surprised I didn't get dinged for it more, but I do plan to become more involved with both areas.
• Act like an admin—I answered one question like an editor. When seeing a war going on, my first reaction was to report both parties, where the admins can sort it out. Duh. I'm supposed to be answering as if I'm the admin, so I need to sort it out, and see that one side is reverting per policy, and the other is not compliant with policy. I'm now supposed to be able to figure that out (cautiously, of course at first, looking for help on less than clear cut situations.) Got it (now, sorry I missed it at the time.)--SPhilbrickT 02:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Crat finally shows up to say...

Well done, I closed your RFA a few minutes ago as successful with 119 supports, 16 opposes and 9 neutrals. Take the advice of those who didn't support you seriously, enjoy the tools, don't forget to enjoy yourself, and all the best. Feel free to contact me or any of your fellow admins at any time for advice as you find out how to use that pesky mop. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I am, after all, here to serve. Hope you enjoy it! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations! If you wish, you can copy the scripts on my page. (I've copied the same from many admins, including GedUK, Werespielchequers...). Best regards Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 13:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats! Your RfA will now forever be listed on WP:100 :) I hope the last remaining days of sanity will be enjoyed with a lovely bottle of Champagne! :) Regards, —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 1:40pm • 02:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Help! Why was I deleted? This is totally unfair!

Hi Sphilbrick,

I'm appealing to you since you were able to help me build my previous Wikipedia pages. I have had all my Wikipedia pages removed, and, just now, my account was deleted!! I've been working with the Wikipedia community to ensure my pages are according to the Wikipedia guidelines, and now everything is gone...I can't believe it. Can you help me get my pages back and reestablish my account? I've also contacted Train 2104 with the following message:

I was working on a new page for Trainer's Choice yesterday, and I see that it has been deleted. I had just started the page and it was definitely not complete, but now it's already gone! On top of that, all of my other previously created Wiki pages were deleted as well :(

I've worked very diligently with other Wikipedia admins to ensure the content of my pages is consistent with Wikipedia guidelines, and now all that work has been deleted...I work for a variety of companies who want to utilize Wikipedia to give content about their company, and NOT USE IT AS A MARKETING RESOURCE. I've worked with the admin to make sure this is the case, but now everything has been deleted.

The following pages were deleted from my account: ~ Trainer's Choice ~ Indital ~ Rhino Rack

How can I get them back and ensure that the pages are not deleted?

Thanks, Joe

Any help is very, very appreciated!! Jmlnarik01 (talk) 20:53, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I will look into it.SPhilbrickT 21:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I just appealed my case to Stephen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stephen) and E Fokker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:E._Fokker), both of whom contributed to the deletion.Jmlnarik01 (talk) 21:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I wish I could be more helpful but I cannot. I thought I corresponded with you about one or more of your contributions, but I'm not finding the record at the moment. I see that Chevymontecarlo provided some feedback on Indital and expressed concern that it sounded like an advertisement. I just took a quick look at Rhino Rack, and see the same concern.

I was more troubled by the statement that your user page was deleted, as we normally don't do that for a legitimate user page, except when a user name is a clear violation of policy, and that didn't seem to be the case. However, I looked at it appears that you were using the user page to work on drafts of the articles, which is not the purpose of the user page.

My original interaction was at the Requests for feedback page. When I provide feedback, I try to avoid proposing articles for deletion at that forum, as it seems better to point out concerns and work to improve articles. However, it still reads like a promotional piece that a company would put together.--SPhilbrickT 21:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Blurb on you

Hi, could you check what I've written and edit as necessary at The Signpost? May we refer to you as she or he? If not, please just replace with your username. Tony (talk) 11:39, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Stoney units

I replied to your query at Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion‎. This isn't the top place for asking general template programming questions, but it worked in this case. If you have a more urgent question, I have found that WP:VPT is very fast. There are also help pages for templates, which aren't quite as fast, but work as well. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, after I posted I thought about VPT, but decided to wait a bit. --SPhilbrickT 18:38, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Cambodian Districts

Hey Sphilbrick, how things? I noticed you recently nuked three Cambodian district articles which came up on my watchlist. For a couple of years, I've been slowly getting the 180 odd Cambodian district articles up to scratch. A district is the second level administrative subdivision in Cambodia - roughly equivalent to a county in the U.S or the U.K - so you can see that Wikipedia needs to have these articles covered. I know these three articles only had an infobox and bugger all other information, but they were all properly categorised, stub tagged, added to appropriate regional templates and tagged for Wikiproject Cambodia. I'd suggest in this situation A3 is a borderline case as A3 deletions exclude pages containing "infoboxes with non-trivial information" and these all had infoboxes with the names in both languages, number of communes and villages and populations. As an involved admin, I'm not going to undelete them myself and I didn't feel that I should remove the speedy tags for the same reason - I've edited all the district pages at one time or another. We now have 3 glaring redlinks in the otherwise complete Template:Districts of Cambodia which will just have to be recreated, re-categorised, re-stub tagged, re-templated, re-infoboxed and then re-tagged for WP Cambodia. If I remember one of your RFA comments correctly, you quoted something like "Get it up, then clean it up." So, how about popping them back? Then I can keep working on cleaning 'em up! :) Cheers, Paxse (talk) 14:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

First I have to bore you with some of the travails of a new admin. I'm not a big fan of WP:BOLD. My nature is to be a little more cautious and make sure (or at least think I make sure) I know what I'm doing. It would be quite embarrassing if my first admin actions were reversed. So I see a notice that MfD is backlogged, but there's a backlog because some of the older ones are fairly contentious, and I decide I'd better get my feet wet on something easier. I look at requested moves, and some one wants to add "The" to a title, and their reasoning is sound. Three days later, and I still don't have it sorted out (don't ask). Then I see a CSD, and it doesn't look right. It was added three minutes after the article was created, admittedly with not much at that time, but much has been added. So confidently, I decline my first CSD on what I think are solid grounds. While I'm writing up my explanation to the nominator, the article disappears. Someone else deleted from under me. Not a week with the bit and I have my first potential wheel war. Good grief.

Then I see a few more CSDs. The Cambodian ones. I check to make sure they aren't new creations. No, they have been around for years, with almost nothing in them. I check the content, of which there's virtually nothing, and check the history. I review the CSD rules, which clearly state that categories don't count toward content. The infobox makes it not quite a slam dunk, but the article didn't even have a lede. Not even a sentence stating that XYZ is a district in Cambodia, located roughly here, with an area of xxx hectares, and an approximate population of xxx and some comment about it.

I do believe in the "get it up and clean it up" philosophy. However, while I felt that in the early days of WP, a trivial sentence like "Jupiter is a planet in the Solar System" would be an acceptable start in mainspace, now I think that level of information (which exceeds the mount of information in the Cambodian village stubs) should be in non-indexed user subpages until a very small hurdle is passed.

I try to view this through the eyes of a random person, hearing a phrase such as "Prey Nob" wanting to know something about it and searching in a search engine to see what they can learn. If they see a hit to Wikipedia, their immediate reaction is "oh good, there is something to read". I want them to be pleasantly surprised at how much information there is about an obscure phase, I can live with a reaction of "there's not much, but there's something", but I don't want to get the readers hopes up by a Wikipedia hit, only to find zero bytes in the main text, a minimal info box, and some categories. It tells the reader almost nothing about the term, except possibly confirming existence. Even that is arguable, because it doesn't have a single citation to a reliable source.

I think my minimum requirements for an article are probably well below the WP consensus position, but these three stubs didn't even meet that low hurdle. I'm not looking for much. Two sentences about the distinct. One sentence, and a coordinates box, so someone could find them on a map. If we don't have that much information, we aren't doing a service to someone who spends the time to navigate to the article, we've done them a disservice.

I have no objection if you want to restore the material to a user subpage, but I think there ought to be more on the page before it is restored to main space.--SPhilbrickT 15:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I recreated Mittakpheap as a tiny stub, with two sentences and one reference, but left the other two alone. If it does not survive as an article, I would like to suggest that it would be better to change it to a redirect to Sihanoukville than to delete it. Cardamon (talk) 08:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

That looks fine to me.--SPhilbrickT 12:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Good grief indeed. Sounds like a horrible initiation into mop wielding. You have my sympathy. It my least favourite part of wikipedia - teh dramaz. At times, it feels like whatever you do, no matter how innocuous, in any part of the encyclopedia - someone WILL complain! Sigh. I'm definitely not going to wheel war over this. In fact I thought long and hard about whether to leave you a message at all, particularly knowing you had just got the bit. Often, I just add the redlink to my list of nuked but notable Cambodian topics for re-creation later - it happens fairly regularly. The problem is that there are very, very few editors actively adding content to Cambodian articles. Most of them are IP editors from Cambodia who are non native English speakers - which means their articles are often horribly written, full of COI, plagiarism and non free images. So, you can imagine things get nuked fairly regularly. I just wish some of these wannabe janitors (not you, the initial CSD tagger) would actually do a little research and write the missing sentence instead of slapping a CSD template on the page. Too much like hard work I guess. Just today someone else twinkled away all the backlinks to those pages and then speedy deleted various redirects with common misspellings. Sigh. My best estimate is that there are about 10,000 missing Cambodia articles needed just to give us reasonable coverage of the country (at least 5000 in geography alone). We also have 554 Cambodian articles with cleanup tags - and many many more with only a single sentence (sometimes less as you found). For goodness sake don't go looking at the rest of the district articles - some are just as bad as those three! Unfortunately, for articles on countries not well represented among WP editors, it really is still "the early days of wikipedia." Poor or missing coverage is the norm. Anyhow, good to meet you, sorry for the rant and enjoy your mop. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you did leave a message. I guarantee I will make some mistakes. I also guarantee I will learn from them, but only if pointed out. I can sympathize with the problem of Cambodian districts. I spent a few hours working to depopulate Category:Tanzania articles missing geocoordinate data, so I've seen my share of very limited articles. Has Cambodia ever done a comprehensive census? That might be a good source of some information on each district.--SPhilbrickT 13:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you can help: George A. Philbrick

Are you in any way related to George A. Philbrick? Never mind answering. Just be advised that the #3 google pick for his name starts with Don't bother looking at Wikipedia for an article about George Philbrick, and this damning statement is as true today as it was three years ago. I was going to put together a proper article myself but, unlike Bob Widlar or Harold Hazen, there are no (not enough) free reliable third-party biographical sources. The Philbrick Archive has loads of primary sources and self-published testimonies, so it's not enough either. So, here I am blatantly canvassing for help with sources on George A. Philbrick - access to journal archives - there's plenty of RS biographical papers behind the paywall.

Can you help?

Cheers, East of Borschov 18:26, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Move of 'Stoney scale units' to 'Stoney units'

Hi,

Thanks for letting me know about the move of 'Stoney scale units' to 'Stoney units'. It has little effect on the purpose of my subpage. I'm sure a redirect will serve my needs just as well. For now, I've blanked my page and may recreate it with recent data later. Cheers. Lightmouse (talk) 16:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of User talk:Subtlefeud

Just letting you know I've restored it. I'm guessing the deletion was an error and you mistakenly thought it was an article talk page maybe? User talk pages are almost never deleted, and the criterion you used (WP:CSD#G8) is not applicable to user talk pages, many of which exist absent a user page. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops, yes. I'm not entirely sure what happened. The block log says I deleted Subtlefeud. I always check "What links here" and I must have jumped to the conclusion that it was the talk page of the article. Sorry, I'll try to pay closer attention.--SPhilbrickT 03:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Forty lashes with a wet noodle for you. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanup. I expect to make some mistakes, but I was planning to start with some easier tasks, and hoped I wouldn't blunder until trying a more difficult task, such as a history merge. (As an aside, 40 lashes with a wet noodle was one of my mother's favorite expressions.)--SPhilbrickT 12:59, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Feedback

I have acknowledged your feedback at Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2010_November_25#User:Ykraps.2FHistory_of_Christchurch.2C_Dorset. Thanks--Ykraps (talk) 20:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your support at my RfA last week. I'll do everything I can to live up to your expectations and trust, including working on my improvement as an editor. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

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

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

Honeywell IS a notable company... what's missing?

Would adding a ref to www.honeywell.com have fixed it?

I am fully aware that I am going through some sort of newbie struggle, so I'm sorry for my unfamiliarity with the system. But are you really saying that Honeywell is not notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by KazooOfTheNorth (talk • contribs) 17:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll look into it, and respond at your talk page.--SPhilbrickT 17:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

So I'm missing more links and the WP inherited, and in so missing these things, have not met the standards of stubbiness?KazooOfTheNorth (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Username blocks

Hi, when blocking a editor for just their username, please take care to use the most relevant rationale and setting. For example, when blocking with {{usernameblock}}, you should disable the autoblock because the template allows and encourages them to create a new account. In the case of User talk:HCWA, {{uw-softerblock}} or {{uw-causeblock}} (which I used) is probably the best option. Autoblocks should only be enabled when the problem is not just the username (spam, vandalism, etc). Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I gave the impression of riding roughshod over you, I just didn't want them to try to create a new account and find the autoblock was stopping them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

A ha. I thought selecting the username option automatically did that. Now I understand why one I did yesterday ran into an issue. (No problem as a response to your follow up). I'm glancing through the New admin school material now, and thinking it may need some tweaking, will come back after I formulate some thoughts.--SPhilbrickT 20:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I think most of it is horribly out of date. The main policy pages (BLOCK, DEL, ADMIN, PP) are kept up to date, but the NAS is neglected. The best way to pick things up really is "on the job". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see I made one major mistake, not reading the instructions carefully enough. I see that Wikipedia:New admin school/Blocking instructions clearly state I need to uncheck two tick boxes, so my bad on that one.

On a different, but related subject, I like the template you used, but it is not one of the choice in the dropdown list. Do you know if it is in the queue for a future release, or is it worth adding to Bugzilla?--SPhilbrickT 20:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

The dropdown menu is here, but the template I used, {{uw-causeblock}} is probably too similar to {{softerblock}}, which is already on there, to be much use. It's a nice template, though, one of the least bitey we have. There's no reason why you can't use one in the block log and another for the talk page. Twinkle has a near-complete index of the standard blocking templates (including causeblock) for tagging talk pages. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I hadn't realized that the block message options were on Twinkle, but now I see them. Let's see if I can do the next one right.--SPhilbrickT 21:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Why did you dump my page?

You dumped my eCom Merchant Solutions entry. why? i completely revamped it after it was dumped the first time. I have looked, and there a many other articles in wikipedia that are very similar, if not more glorified, than the article i created i.e. Facebook, Walmart, Authorize.net, and others. all of the links in the body of the articles pointed to other wikipedia categories and articles. it was very dry, very matter of fact, with no 'point of view' at all. if i'm not somehow following your formula for a successful entry, please let me know how to correct that. I'm having a hard time maneuvering this site as it is. and if you are going to continue to delete me, then please explain to me, in detail, why the aforementioned articles get to stay. thank you,

Kkliese (talk) 19:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC) KarinKkliese (talk) 19:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll respond at your talk page shortly.--SPhilbrickT 19:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear SPhilbrick:

I made some additional changes to my draft article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dalecorey/draft_Howard_M._Guttman) and wrote a message on its discussion page explaining to you what I did. I haven't heard back from you, so I'm wondering if I was supposed to leave the message for you here, not there. In case that is so, here it is. I also went to the request for feedback page again and thought I left a message there asking for help, but somehow it didn't seem to have been entered there. I can't find it. Thanks for whatever further direction you can provide.

Dear S. Philbrick: Thank you for all the suggestions and edits that you made. I followed your J&J example and removed the embedded links. Wherever possible, I replaced these with a link to a Wikipedia page.

I added a few more citations/footnotes.

I removed the bullets from the Ideas section and put the paragraphs into prose format.

Lastly, I changed the order of the paragraphs somewhat, to focus on the ideas first and the publications later and to sound less like a resume and more like an exposition of Mr. Guttman's ideas, which have had a large impact on organization development.

Do you think that my article now meets the Wikipedia standards? Who makes the final decision, and who removes the "issues" that are listed at the top of the article?

Thank you, Dale Corey Dalecorey (talk) 21:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.83 (talk)

Whatsit prod

Hadn't noticed that the original prodder hadn't done it. Done now. Peridon (talk) 16:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--SPhilbrickT 16:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

About Level-Four Words :-)

Dear Sphilbrick,

I understand that I was a bit slow for the article. Since I'm in charge of the academic subjects for the Chinese students in general, the English words there had to be memorized by heart. The words were in rhyme, and grouped by classical American meanings; funny and meaningful.

So when the Chinese students and I memorized enough of these words, I'll then come back to put most of them in, ok?

Love, Anthony

Xin Xing Education, National Tests Designer —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnthonyNotes (talk • contribs) 21:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Searches

I've finally got my archive box fixed. Take a look: User_talk:Fly_by_Night/Archive. I had to make it all from scratch using Wikitables. My head's spinning. The search bar still isn't working, but this section of Help:Searching explains it. — Fly by Night (talk) 01:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I may have to steal your code.--SPhilbrickT 01:36, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Fell free! — Fly by Night (talk) 15:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Ed Mirza

Remember to delete the resulting redirect when userfying from mainspace. By default the move form has a checkmark at "Leave a redirect behind". PrimeHunter (talk) 04:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Oops, thanks for the reminder.--SPhilbrickT 14:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

how can i restore my first deleted content

hi there i created a content named it Science framework. but because no notable content it deleted but i try add more details for it. how can i restore this article. it is new open source idea that can be base of "open science" and "open science research". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Molavy (talk • contribs) 17:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll take care of it for you.--SPhilbrickT 17:45, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

quinhydrone

the knowledge on quinhydrone is sound the source is a chemical directory it connects buyers and sellers in a global market place i see no reason not to share this basic knowledge when it is being soley encouraged to be read —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonwithey (talk • contribs) 20:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Template ConvertAbbrev

Thanks for responing so quickly to the delete requests of subpages of Template:ConvertAbbrev. I believe you have deleted a few pages that weren't supposed to be deleted, however. Only the pages marked with a speedy delete tag should be deleted (and of course their talk pages if they exist.

I would appreciate it if you would restore the following pages that you deleted:

• Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-2/MX
• Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-2/MX/doc
• Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-2/CA
• Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-2/CA/doc

Sorry for the confusion. Thanks!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Done--SPhilbrickT 20:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I did check "What links here in some cases, but didn't see any red flags, so I didn't check them all. Let me know if any others need to be restored.--SPhilbrickT 20:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Those were the only ones that I saw that needed to be restored. I will eventually redirect all of the /doc pages to a single doc, but no administrator involvement is needed for that. Everything looks great to me for the time being. I know in a while I will have one more request for deletion (Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-2:US), but that can't be deleted until {{Infobox NRHP}} is updated to bypass that redirect. At present several thousand articles link to that redirect, so deleting it would cause a lot of trouble haha. If, however, you'd be willing to update that infobox, then that redirect could be deleted now and it would be finished. If not, however, things are perfectly fine for the time being. Thanks again for the help.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I use the NRHP infobox quite a bit, but I don't know what change is needed. If you know what needs to be changed and tell me, I'll try.--SPhilbrickT 21:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox NRHP#Tweaks to infobox. Just copy the sandbox code over.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 21:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll do it in about an hour, I need to put my tree up.--SPhilbrickT 21:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)