User talk:Stifle/Archive 0411

Article for Deletion - Ziad Abdelnour

Hi! Thank you Stifle for your comment on my talk page. I was trying to get an Admin's attention. I care about Wikipedia's content but I am technically challenged. I need your kind help to place the Article for Deletion message. Thank you very much. Worldedixor (talk) 02:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

• Replied on your talk. Stifle (talk) 07:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcment warning request

Hello Stifle,

With this edit [1], User:PANONIAN divulged his personal opinion about the Hungarians, which is totally unaccaptable regarding both Wiki-policy and the inwardess of Wikipedia when saying that :

quote1
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
“ Ok, Wiki rules are to be respected and if someone conduct revert warring talk page is a place where this kind of disruption should be elaborated. Man can feed his soul from two sources: love or hate. It really amuse me how much of their own free time are some people ready to spend to feed their hate and to spread it around. It amuse me how some Greater Hungarian nationalists are still dreaming that borders will be changed and that they again will rule over "minor races". Justice for Hungary was served in Trianon. In modern free and democratic World it is not acceptable that an local minority rule over local majority. Bačka is majority Slavic, so attempts of asserting an aggressive Hungarism in article about Bačka cannot have other interpretation but one that the person who trying to assert that thinks that in some close or distant future Bačka will be attached to Greater Hungary in which local Hungarian minority will rule over local Slavic majority. Nationalism, ethnic oppression and genocide are examples of poisonous legacy that Hungarian rule left in Bačka. ”

And in an another edit, the user again started to provoke the Hungarian users ,referring to the Treaty of Trianon in which Hungary lost 70% of its territory.[2]  :

quote2
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
“ and have a nice day in Trianon Hungary ”

And lastly, PANONIAN continued to hurl abuse at Hungarians [3]:

quote3
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
“ Well, as I said, this is not article about destroyed monument. It would be best that we have picture of undamaged monument instead of this one. However, since you took this picture of damaged monument in 2009, events relevant to this picture are only those after 2009, i.e. the events that we should describe in relation to this picture are that monument was damaged and that boys who damaged it are arrested. Why else would somebody speak about damaged monument if not with a goal that police find and arrest those who done this? So, they are arrested and what seems to be the problem if that is mentioned? Of course, in that way, Wikipedia readers would see that Serbian state and police are actually protecting Hungarian minority and their monuments, which contradicts to Greater Hungarian nationalistic propaganda that human rights of Hungarians in Serbia, Slovakia and Romania are violated. The goal of such propaganda is certainly not this action of Serbian state and police that arrested those who are responsible for minority monument damaging. The true goal of that propaganda would be much larger event in which borders would be changed and these lands would be transfered from Serbian to Hungarian state, and then, Hungarian police would "rightfully punish" those boys responsible for monument damaging, not only by arresting them, but by executing them, since "no such enemies of Hungarian state should walk alive" (of course, such fate could reach all non-Hungarians in "future Greater Hungary", no matter if they are damaging Hungarian monuments or not - by the view of Hungarian nationalism, they are just "minor races" that should be ruled by "noble Hungarians"). This is the true nature of this problem. ”

Even if there are some hazy parts in his messages as his English grammar does not always make sense to me, his recent actions look like ethnic based provocation that may be amenable to Wiki policy. Recently, I have tried to contact him telling that this type of behavior is unwelcome on WP and that ask for an Arbitration enforcment warning by an administrator to which the user answered with a talk page revert, using an edit summary of "please find another place for sandbox games". [4]

Could you please deliver PANONIAN an Arbitration enforcment warning as an administrator, in order to be possible to debrief him on ArbCom if this type of behavior of him remains inexorable?

Thanks.--Nmate (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

As per my /FAQs and talk page editnotice, I do not get involved in disputes between other parties. Please raise your request on WP:AE or WP:ANI as appropriate. Stifle (talk) 12:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

O.K.--Nmate (talk) 12:23, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

• News and notes: 1 April activities; RIAA takedown notice; brief news

• In the news: Academic contributions; Jimmy Wales weighs in on murder trial controversy; brief news

• Editor retention: Fighting the decline by restricting article creation?

• WikiProject report: Out of this world — WikiProject Solar System

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: AUSC appointments, new case, proposed decision for Coanda case, and motion regarding CU/OS

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Parliament: UPLB Debate Society

You've previously proposed this for deletion. I invite you to the discussion. Moray An Par (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC).

Proposed deletion of Shershah Syed

Hi there! So... I've added another reference and a few extra sentences. Is this enough, or does it need more? I'm sorry, I'm not much of an article writer, more of a gnome ;) Dracunculus (talk) 20:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

You're entitled to remove the proposed deletion notice if you feel it's enough. I think it would be borderline on whether it would pass an AFD. Stifle (talk) 07:52, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Two questions: (1) if I don't remove it, does it get deleted automatically? (2) is the problem that it needs more secondary sources? (there are currently three news articles) or does it need more text or something? Thanks again for your assistance :) Dracunculus (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Someone else has removed it now, so it is moot. Stifle (talk) 09:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Seyed Mohammad Marandi

Hello Stifle. I received your message, and I will try to improve the article by adding sources, then I will remove the deletion box. Timelesstune (talk) 2:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. Stifle (talk) 07:52, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, This article was vandalized by an unknown user. I reverted it, but I think we must expect other cases of vandalism on this article with respect to the touchiness of its content. Could I possibly ask you to keep a supervisory eye on this article? Thank you very much. Timelesstune (talk) 9:15, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no. I am not able to commit to that. Please use your watchlist. Stifle (talk) 08:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Saint Edmund Campion Catholic School Page

The entries by Rowan 72 are supportable by references cited. Can you please stop the page being vandalised by third parties. It is important all aspect are there for parents etc to view. I cannot currently access. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rowan72 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

• The page is locked due to edit warring. Please discuss your edits on the talk page. Wikipedia is not, however, the Daily Mirror; we do not go running exposés. Stifle (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Good morning Stifle. Recent contributions by StEdmundCampionRCSchool appear to be vandalism of contributions by previous user Wall. There were verifiable sources from a local newspaper. Please block further vandalism by this user or protect the page.

Thank you

Mishmash71 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashmash71 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

About my request - WT:WHITELIST#examiner.com Boney James: CONTACT

Hello there, and sorry for invading your space, but I need your help in this matter, I need to whitelist this site in order to continue expanding and writing an article, can you check it out for me? I'm not asking you to whitelist it right way, I just need your help in what is it needed to have it whitelisted, because if you think my argument was not valid enough to unblock the site, you can close the discussion. Anyway I need it in order to proceed my current task and this seems to be an obstacle for me. Thanks in advance

Regards Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 19:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

• News and notes: Editor retention; Malayalam loves Wikimedia; Wikimedia reports; brief news

• In the news: What if experts just want to get their links into Wikipedia?; brief news

• Recent research: Research literature surveys; drug reliability; editor roles; BLPs; Muhammad debate analyzed

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Japan

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Two cases closed – what does the Coanda decision tell us?

• Technology report: The Toolserver explained; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy

Hi, I noticed you declined the speedy of the page I created on grounds that other editors had edited the article. I have been the only editor to have added content to the article (the IP editing the article earlier on was me; partially the reason why I want the article deleted). All other edits have been either vandalism or other technical maintenance (categories, AWB etc). Thanks, Stickee (talk) 09:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I ask is there any other reason you want the article deleted? It seems like a reasonable article. Stifle (talk) 09:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Emailed. Stickee (talk) 09:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Stickee (talk) 11:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

AFD sockpuppetry

Hi, would you relook at this discussion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Avraham_Gileadi to see if there needs t be a correction, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 00:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Who are you saying is a sock? Is there an SPI? Stifle (talk) 07:57, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Effingcrazy and User:יום יפה two delete votes are now both blocked as sockpuppets, it was late last night and I had them down as the same user but they are two different abusive accounts, Removing them leaves a delete and merge, a merge, and a keep. Never mind, just when I see two out of five commenters in an AFD as indefinitely blocked abusive accounts it leaves me asking was the outcome affected by these accounts comments, looking again in the morning light it seems like the correct outcome was likely achieved, in spite of them, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 10:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

• News and notes: Commons milestone; newbie contributions assessed; German community to decide on €200,000 budget; brief news

• In the news: Wikipedia accurate on US politics, plagiarized in court, and compared to Glass Bead Game; brief news

• WikiProject report: An audience with the WikiProject Council

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Case comes to a close after 3 weeks - what does the decision tell us?

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Donate

Hello Stifle. I'm trying to track down the provenance of this solicitation, apart from your good self. Can you help? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

• It's from the OTRS stock replies list (as a reply to "do you accept Indian rupees"?) Stifle (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I removed a phishing-type link from that page today and thought I'd check the others. Since I can't check OTRS I'll take your word that you've checked it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Eep. Nice catch. I have verified the link is good. That page should have been protected all along. Stifle (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Patricia Araujo

would it be possible for you to restore this page i have new sources and citations showing her notability as a model http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/17/patricia-araujo-rio-fashi_n_158823.html http://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/Transgender-Model-Steals-the-Show-at-Rio-Fashion-Week-2.jpg/ http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2008655563_webfashionrio22.html http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Jan17/0,4670,LTBrazilTransgenderModel,00.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirame (talk • contribs) 02:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Born This Way Deluxe Edition.jpg

Stifle can you delete or ffd this please? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

• News and notes: Survey of French Wikipedians; first Wikipedian-in-Residence at Smithsonian; brief news

• In the news: Low-hanging fruit and sustainability; Qwiki on iPad; sceptic critic; brief news

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Somerset

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Request to amend prior case; further voting in AEsh case

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)