User talk:Tanthalas39

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.
Archives:
January 2008 and before
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008


Contents

[edit] Gabriel Murphy Article Protection

I see that you protected the "Gabriel Murphy" article, but before reverting back to a redirect. I am not sure if you are aware, but this article was recently underwent a deletion review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review). The vote was 4 to 3 in favor of overturning the article versus endorsing the redirect. Since that time the article has consistently been redirected to aplus.net despite the deletion review. I thought I would bring this to your attention as I think the deletion review establishes that the article should stand on its own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.132.152 (talk) 03:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

DRV discussions are not votes. The DRV was closed as endorsing the AfD, which I stated in my RPP action. Its clear you have a vested interest in this man and keeping the article alive; consider this a formal warning to knock off the disruptive edits, canvassing, and other bullshit. Also, put talk page messages at the end, where they're supposed to go. Tan | 39 04:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA questions

Although they are marked as optional questions, but still, if possible, it'd be nice if you answered Questions 6-13 in your RFA. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 04:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Nsk92, I apologize if I have been being rude. That certainly wasn't the intent. I believe that my record, my policy knowledge, and my statements already made on the RfA speak for themselves. While I respect your opinions and questions, these questions are indeed optional, as has been made clear over many, many talk page discussions. While some editors, yourself apparently included, believe that they are mandatory by culture, I believe otherwise. The first two optional questions from Toddst1 were directly targeted at my prior actions so I chose to answer them. The remaining questions have been much more general; you can infer much, much more about me with a little bit of contribution research than by asking non-personal questions. If you have specific questions about me - why I chose to !vote one way or another, my editing style, etc. - I would be more than happy to answer. As Gwynand pointed out, however, you asked six open-ended questions that in order to properly address and give reasonable, thought-out answers, I would have to spend several hours. One could comment on the "politeness" of asking so many questions, with no explanation as to the concerns driving them, and then demanding answers. I feel this is unfair to me.
Again, absolutely nothing personal and no disrespect intended whatsoever. I am merely explaining why I have not addressed your questions. Also, if you do have legitimate concerns regarding my viewpoints, style, or knowledge, by all means ask away and I will address ASAP. Tan | 39 19:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the explanation. I think that answering RFA questions is useful for the people who are not well familiar with the candidate since it does take a long time to look through the contribution history, diffs etc (which still has to be done, of course, to a certain degree anyway, but still...). The reason I asked my open-ended questions is not to get the "right" answer (in most complicated situations there is not really a unique "right" answer) but to see that a candidate for an adminship will be able to make a reasonably quick but also well-reasoned decision when faced with real-life less-than-straightforward cases. For people who know you well this may not be necessary, but for the rest of us it would have been useful. I don't really have serious concerns in your case and I was basically looking for a confirmation of what the other support voters have said. Actually, I am slightly concerned about the civility issues discussion in your RFA, but certainly not enough to transform into an oppose vote. What you say about POV pushers crying "incivility" when they are brought to task for POV pushing is certainly true. However, civility is still a basic and important value of WP community and I would have been happier if I had seen some specific instances where you admonished some editor for incivility in any kind of context, AFD, talk page, RFA or whatever. I had been a WP editor for much shorter period of time than you and I have already seen a fair share of genuinely incivil comments. I am sure that the same is true for you.
I don't think I'll vote in your RFA, although it is clear now that it will succeed, as I am glad to see. I congratulate you on the imminent approval of your adminship and wish you good luck in your new admin role on Wikipedia. Regards, Nsk92 (talk) 07:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good News

I am sure you, and others, will be happy to see this. [1] Red4tribe (talk) 18:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] congrats

Let me be the first to congratulate you on the success of your RfA. All the best, Vishnava talk 18:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Vish! I look forward to more RfA discussion with you ;-) Tan | 39 18:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hot damn.

[2]. Control F5 my friend, Control F5....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 18:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. ;) Check out the tips for new administrators I have here, if you have the time. Regards, Anthøny 18:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks scribe, AGK. I'll make ya proud! Tan | 39 18:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Excellent, congrats. :D Well deserved. Good luck! PeterSymonds (talk) 19:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Gratz Tan, nice job setting an example to others and proving than you don't always need to answer the deluge of questions to be successful. =) xenocidic (talk) 19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks guys. Xeno, I agree - I really was sort of proving a point there. Glad it didn't bite me in the ass. Speaking of getting bit in the arse, I just made three CSD deletions, let's see if I get my first "why?" message. Tan | 39 19:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to make one of these in your own userspace, giving credit to the creator of it of course, User:Jonny-mt. Since adding the WAIT! on top of my talkpage, I rarely if ever get poked at for my speedy deletes. Very refreshing... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this fun??? Ready to give the buttons back yet?  :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it's very interesting. I don't think I'll fuck up too badly. My intent in using the tools right now isn't for the sake of using them; it's more to see how people respond - not only to using the buttons, but not using the buttons (declining speedys, etc). Anyway, I appreciate you stepping in on that G11 - feel free to keep an eye on me as long as you want ;-) Tan | 39 20:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't think so either. Congratulations (I mean that). Let me know if I can be of assistance. Toddst1 (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Toddst1. It's all good; there always has to be someone leading the opposition. You kept it interesting for me. See you around! Tan | 39 21:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Per your above Tan, you'll find you tend to spend a lot of time declining speedies. And well done my man - best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  21:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Pedro. I really appreciate your support and advice over the past six months. I'm not doing the RfA thank spam. Think anyone will take offense? ;-) Tan | 39 22:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Nope! Shove a message on your user page for 24 hours. No big deal remember?! Oh, and e-mail me for the handy hints to get through the block on deleting the main page ...... :) Pedro :  Chat  22:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Congratulations. I'm sorry I didn't review the RfA to see you had responded to my Neutral, but it appears moot anyhow. I am glad that my concerns were not sufficient to dissuade the majority of the participating community. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC) ps. Welcome to the club (just don't swing it too vigorously at first!)

[edit] Admin dashboard

Hey Tan, feel free to test drive my administrative dashboard. Either copy it, or transclude it. Let me know if you think of any ways to improve it. As for the thank spam, you could always just leave a general thank-you on the talk page of your RFA, or at WT:RFA as someone did a week or so ago. xenocidic (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Well done! I wish you well in the new job. Rudget (Help?) 15:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Kudos.--Ecoleetage (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dafoh

I have nominated this article for deletion as you suggested. However, it does appear that it was speedied before as DAFOH. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 20:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm keeping an eye. One good thing about taking it to AfD is that if there's a consensus (especially a strong one) to delete, then we won't have to keep seeing this and can just delete as G4. Definitely no comment on you by my speedy decline, just being careful :-) Tan | 39 20:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, no problem. Thanks for the assist. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 20:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] X Is Loaded

Hi. I'm curious about your edit comment, speedy declined, page has significant history. . I don't see anything in WP:CSD about how long the edit history may be. I suppose you could make a reasonable argument that this fails A7 because it asserts notability, and that might be a valid reason to decline the speedy, but length of edit history itself doesn't seem valid. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a note, but multiple references (as we have here) pretty much says A7 will not apply - valid references can be taken as an assertion of notability even if the main body text doesn't contain one. Pedro :  Chat  23:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Concordia College Band

My name is Nathan Larsen. I'm a Senior at Concordia College, and am the President of The Concordia College Band. I am writing in response to your recent deletion of the page about The Band. I simply intended to post a page about The Band to help inform people about some of The Band's history and its current happenings. I guess I would just like an explanation why it was deleted, especially when other music ensembles, namely The Concordia Choir, are allowed to enjoy a full page on Wikipedia. Thank you.

Nllarsen (talk) 04:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem here, Nathan, is notability. Reading the The Concordia Choir page, it's a little like comparing apples to uranium. Wikipedia isn't a place to promote your band, or "inform people" about the history. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we have to draw a line of notability somewhere. If you read WP:N and WP:BAND, and explain to me how it meets these requirements, I would be more than happy to reconsider this deletion. I have absolutely nothing against your particular article; I am merely upholding established Wikipedia policy. Tan | 39 04:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk pages

Heh, yeah, I did that. It'll come naturally. :) Doing a great job so far! Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting My Articles

Hmm, Hey. I was writing two articles, one named Transformer Search Engine and the other one is for tirgumit. After reading the intro to your page I realized I was doing a commercial to the search engine and to the translation software. I wish to edit those pages and not start from scratch, and there for, a little story, Dr. Seuss style:

    Once apon a time in a far far away land

there was a little boy who wished for a dividend. His boss always told him: "work hard. get your work done" but as for that dividend - he said none. So the boy work hard, he became a man, even his boss is now a fan. "Oh, you're so good" the boss always said "but as for that dividend, what are you mad?!" So after lots of pondering and thinking and wondering and sitting and hoping and wishing I had an idea all mighty it was like my head glowed with something light(y) "I should add our softwares in Wikipedia" (and everyone knows it's the number one encyclopedia) And so the story goes on to your hands, Mr. Tan, please help me to be a man (with dividends)

Thanks, and Sorry for all the trouble, I'm kinda new around here, Elad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elad1010 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Ha! Thanks for understanding. Let me know if you need any help. Tan | 39 16:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your CSD sub-page

Hi. Would you mind if I take it over to a sub-page of mine, for use too? Of course giving you credit. Arienh4(Talk) 17:37, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, although it isn't mine - the credit is at the bottom of the existing page. Have at it! Tan | 39 17:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Professor Sa'ad Medhat

You declined to speedily delete the above -- if that does not constitute blatant advertising for the man and his foundation, what does? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 17:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I declined the speedy. While I agree the article has massive COI and POV issues, it appeared to me that there was a chance the man was notable enough for inclusion. Probably not likely, but I thought it prudent to send to AfD, which it has been. I suggest you chime in there. Tan | 39 17:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] *crash*

We e/ced here when I went to delete it for the second time ;) You on NPP? It was on my watchlist.

Ha, I ec'd with YOU the first time you deleted it, then watchlisted it. I salted it for two weeks. Sign your posts ;-) Tan | 39 18:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah some people truly don't get it. I had fun playing whack a mole earlier with User:IconoplastDesignsInc.'s spam. *Smacks* we don't need no stinkin' sigs :-p TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 18:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, how cute, two of my little admin babies.....tee hee! Glad you two are having fun! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Ha! Yer just jealous we're posting somewhere other than your talk page. Tan | 39 19:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Nuh-uh. *sniff*.... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Your talk exploded earlier -- or yesterday -- I hit refresh on my watchlist and it went splodey. Admin babies... Admin patch kids? :) TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
My talkpage takes forever to load in my archaic work PC, I'm gonna make my archiver work faster. For. Ever. I usually just hit diff in my watchlist to read something...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Before I got my new toy at home, I couldn't read yours or DGG's talkpages from home. Now life is good. I still need to put my watchlist on a diet. DGG warned me it would explode, I didn't realize how quickly. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

<- heh, yeah. I used to watchlist everything I did admin related. Every CSD, every AFD close, every article that I closed as "keep". All gone, none watched. I figure, if someone has a problem, they'll find me, I don't need to watch the article/redlink. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Mine stemmed more from the backlog, that and the preference to watchlist every page I touched in any way. Now once they appear on my watchlist I unwatch. The world won't end if I miss something o there. My orange bar fear of 'oh crap did I do something wrong?' is passing too. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm hoping Tan is enjoying all the orange bars, without getting a word in edgewise....welcome to my world! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
admit it, you miss us when it's quiet. :) TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 20:37, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen my talkpage today? Good grief, anything but quiet...although, I will say that now that I was successful in forcing the community to grant you both admin buttons, I've served my purpose and fully expect that you'll shun me :-). Get ready, both of you. Your archives, your talkpages, and your wiki-life (if you choose to use the buttons, which it looks like you both are doing frequently) are about to get busier. Fair warning. Content contribs? What are those? :-) BTW, I'm actually looking forward to when one of you or the other "passes on" what I did, which is push you towards adminship. I can't wait to see who you nominate! Always be looking, there are some fantastic editors out there that deserve the toolbelt and will use it wisely and for the betterment of Wikipedia. When you've got one on the hook, write a nom! Go to WP:RFA/NOM for instructions, couldn't be easier... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Nah won't be shunning. There's far too much baseball season left ;) Glad to see others contributing to the Keeper-pedia. I haven't ended up with half the questions on my talk page that others do. I'm sure they'll happen when I start closing more AfDs. Right now my admin work is CSDs. Still keeping up some content work, see this from this morning. I'm a geek, can't help it ;) I have one on the hook, will likely end up being a co-nom when/if he finally accepts. And yes.... it stemmed back from when you/Rudget first brought it up with me. Will probably be some time from now. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 20:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I really don't have anything else to say. I just want Tan to have another orange bar. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry! I was flying home from Dallas, so I just got them all at once. Tan | 39 00:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • crash redux* here. You in my time zone? There will apparently be no backlog tonight. Imagine if you, Gwen Gale and I were at it at once, we'd e/c more than on Keeper's page! TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 02:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Ha, hi Tcari. I live in Phoenix, so for half the year - yes ;-) I know, I was just thinking I need to venture into AfDs or something. Or edit late at night. Tan | 39 02:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I haven't closed too many AfDs. I've gone through the motions of closing some, planning out my close and doing all but the close to then see how it does close. Late at night is fun -- quieter, tame watch list keeps me focused. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 02:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harley Young

Hi there. I'm working at WP:NPP. Did a ghits search on this Major League baseball player. Found some solid references like this and this. I did some copyediting to the article, but before I could save that, it was deleted. Would you reconsider? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rosiestep. If I were you, I'd just start over - there was seriously nothing worth saving on the version I deleted. Let me know if you really want the two poorly written sentences that existed... Tan | 39 18:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Late support

Hi Tanthalas39, I realize that I never actually got around to supporting your recent successful RfA. Well, I'm sorry that I didn't actually vote in the RfA, but consider this message a late support from me! :) Good luck. Acalamari 02:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd be concerned had I failed with, say, 73% ;-) No worries - I appreciate the vote of confidence. Tan | 39 02:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! Acalamari 02:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bio Jonathan Yaniv

There are so many people with Bio's on here that are as important and me, and there articles have not been deleted.

It is only fair that if you delete mine, you should delete theirs as well.

Or let me have mine.

Hi there. Read WP:N and WP:BIO, and get back to me. Tan | 39 02:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Oops

Sorry... I'll try to use the right tags in the future. Kivar2 (talk) 02:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kalamazoo Kingdom

Hi Tanthalas - I'm hoping you're the person who can help me... I noticed you deleted the bio for Mike Guilliatt - thank you. Is there any chance you could do the same thing for every other member of the Kalamazoo Outrage soccer team roster EXCEPT Terry Alvino? Someone added a whole load of circular redirects to that team, which makes keeping track of the players impossible, and I've been trying to solicit the help of an admin to rectify the situation. Can you help? Is there some formal process I need to go through, or can you just do it? Thanks. --JonBroxton (talk) 03:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

There ya go. Tan | 39 03:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Outstanding! Thank you. --JonBroxton (talk) 03:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Amman Baccalaureate School

Found some copyvio'ed material at Amman Baccalaureate School. Found the copyright material with these edits: [3]. Should the edits be deleted? -WarthogDemon 03:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The edits, or the whole page? Is the whole page a copyvio? If so, mark it with the appropriate CSD tag. If it's just part, feel free to excise it yourself... Tan | 39 03:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I did but just discovered I could revert the edits. Wasn't sure if the edits themselves needed to be deleted, though. Thanks. :) -WarthogDemon 03:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Tranghese

Could you please restore Mike Tranghese? I didn't create the article, and I recognize that it was only a stub. The link to Big East Conference was spelled incorrectly, which is why it appeared as a redlink. Several references in reliable sources can be found at this Google News search. --Eastmain (talk) 03:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Done. Tan | 39 03:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Nordbeck deletion

Hi, Tan, it is Bruce Cherner from Bruce Cherner Antique Silver in Acton, MA here. In the course of researching an extraordinary object by Nordbeck, I noticed that Wikipedia lacked an entry on him and decided to take a few minutes and post one. As mentioned in my article, he was the most talented of the Halifax silversmiths working during that time period. My sources are Langford "Canadian Silversmiths and Their Marks"; also http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0007397 among others.

If you'd be so kind as to restore this post, I'm sure that it would add to the overall quality of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.48.138 (talk) 15:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Restored temporarily pending article fixes and most importantly, proper assertation of notability. Please read WP:BIO and WP:V. Happy editing - Tan | 39 15:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Broken Frontier deletion

Hi there. Would it be possible to learn more about the basis for deleting the broken frontier article? I personally thought it contained enough notability to forestall a blink and you miss it deletion.

The site hosts the blogs of several relatively small, though notable comics publishers. It has been bought and sold, and it hosts hundreds of interview with major comics professionals, who presumably would find the site notable enough within the industry to volunteer their time.

Is there anything specific that you are looking for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keysturns (talk • contribs) 16:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there Keysturns. Wikipedia is not an internet guide. You might want to read WP:WEB, that should clearly show that this site doesn't nearly qualify for inclusion. The reason it was speedy deleted is that the article, as written, didn't even make an assertation of notability according to WP:WEB. Let me know if you have further questions. Tan | 39 16:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clear span structures

The article had been speedy deleted twice as blatant advertising in the same form as it is now. You declined the speedy, but didn't provide any explanation in the edit summary. Would you care to explain? BradV 17:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I don't think it meets speedy criteria. The subject might be notable, and the advertising parts can be removed. Feel free to take to AfD or forum-shop around for another admin who agrees with you. Tan | 39 18:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I hope the recommendation to forum-shop for another admin was made tongue-in-cheek. ;) BradV 18:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Eh, yeah, it was. What it meant was, "I don't think it should be deleted, but don't care if someone else does" :-) Tan | 39 18:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Gwen already pwnd the article. P.S. Tan you might want to familiarize yourself with the {{AIV}} commenting template for easy AIV work. xenocidic (talk) 18:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I saw (and anticipated) that Gwen did - she's much more, uh, "frank" than I will probably ever be. Anyways, yeah, I haven't learned all the shortcuts yet - thanks ;-) Tan | 39 18:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sticky & Sweet Tour

I was getting ready to fill out a RFPP, thanks a ton!!!! Now, you did go through and check first to make sure that its not a protected vandalous page didn't you? Dusticomplain/compliment 18:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Someone beat you to the RPP, that's why I protected. I'm confused about your second statement - "a protected vandalous page"? Vandalized? It wasn't already protected, if that's what you meant. Tan | 39 18:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
What I mean, is did you go through and clean out the vandalism? I'm not familiar with the tour, so I'm not sure what is vandalism and what isn't. Dusticomplain/compliment 18:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
No, I didn't. It's just semi-protected, so whoever is interested in the article can do that... Tan | 39 18:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wicked Bible

Hi! Could I ask you to read the article and check it carefully, paying attention to the language? I haven't been speaking in English for a long time. Thanks in advance, Timpul my talk 19:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AIV re 80.194.x.x

I went counter to your comment there, because this is a complex vandal that was explained to me yesterday. I declined it yesterday as well. xenocidic (talk) 19:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I think I'll assume you know what you're doing, there. Thanks for stepping in. Tan | 39 19:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Np. P.S. you still need to tildefy the {{AIV}} template. xenocidic (talk) 19:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Good god, I'm the FNG around here, aren't I :-) Tan | 39 19:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Don't worry, you'll get over it. ;> xenocidic (talk) 19:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Our conversation spurned a random improvement to a disambiguation page. =) xenocidic (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Ha, very nice. I should listen to that album. Tan | 39 20:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Impromtu Wikipedia Deletion

Hi Tan,

We are new to the wikipedia scene...or constructing any forms of web-based sites to begin with so pleae bear with us. Today you deleted a page, entitled Heartland International, claiming it was blatant advertising. We are a local nonprofit organization in Chicago and looking to increase awareness and support of our organization's cause. We are also looking to create an informative page on wikipedia as many of our fellow nonprofits already have. We are still in the middle of teaching ourselves the logistics of wikipedia and how to properly format the information in the article. We would appreciate if you could reinstate our page so as we may have the time needed to complete it properly.

Thank you very much. All the Best with your future work.

-HeartlandIntl HeartlandIntl (talk) 21:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Right in your statement above is a mistake - "looking to increase awareness and support". Pretty much the de facto definition of advertising - see WP:ORG and WP:SPAM. Also, the fact that you are involved with the site creates a conflict of interest that is a rather huge strike against an article about your organization. This is an encyclopedia, not a directory or the yellow pages. However, I'll place a copy of your article in your userspace, so you can access it and/or edit it. You can find it here. Tan | 39 21:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Gary RfA

Yeah, he's probably ready now, but his last RfA closed in April, and I want a nice three month span between the two in order to deflect all the "OMG, power hunger" !votes that a two month period would. Naturally, it's up to him whether he wants to go through with it (seeing as you need nerves of steel to stand the hell it's become now), and if he wants to go now, I'll nominate him, although I'll state to him that I would prefer a month. That said, he has improved quite a bit, so it may be a non-factor. Thoughts? Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 21:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I remember that RfA now. Shoot, I think you're right to wait a bit - considering the (majority of) opposes weren't for lack of experience, but "sloppiness" and things of that nature. A lot of editors will see that he's improved - but, like you said, RfA is hell and he's going to get opposition no matter what if he doesn't have a perfect history. I'm sure he's "ready" now; you just have to play the timing game now :-) Tan | 39 21:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
If I ever run again, I'd prefer it if I could get some new criticism from those who opposed my last RFA and if they think I have improved, then I'd like them to co-nom a future RFA. Gary King (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Probably a good idea. Sorry to have this conversation "behind your back", Gary, I just figured you'd have Seph's talk page watchlisted and would find it yourself... anyway, you'll certainly have my support when you run. Tan | 39 21:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Maybe a year or two is good padding before running again :) Also, I'm not quite sure how I should go about "asking" for co-nominations. I think I will just wait until people offer to do so; beyond that, I will just continue to do what I'm doing already. Gary King (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you need one, I'd be happy to. I'd have to go through your edits a lot more than I have, but I'm sure I'd still strongly support... I know you want one from a past opposer, I'm jussayin'. Tan | 39 21:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Anyways, instead of putting myself through RFA again in the near future, I will probably continue to submit requests through venues such as WP:AIV, WP:RPP, and WP:CSD. I only do so every once in a while, so there is no urgent need for any tools. Gary King (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, yeah. Whether or not it's the attitude you actually have, it's certainly the attitude you are supposed to have before an RfA. God forbid you actually aspire to be something. Tan | 39 21:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Heh, yeah. I've found my niche at WP:FTC, WP:FAC, and WP:FLC and help out there when I can by improving articles, submitting nominations, and commenting on nominations. I think I've commented on every nomination at each process since late May... Gary King (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Because this page is on my watchlist, let me just say that I'm very impressed Gary with your attitude about adminship, and I will say that I am also looking forward to your next RfA, whenever that may be. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, if I were ever to become an administrator, I would focus my energy more on content and templates rather than WP:RPP and WP:AIV (which I think is where I spend most of my time when considering admin-related areas). Of course, I would still be at those places, but I would primarily focus on content, like edit protected requests, for fairly obvious reasons—because I love article building. I would probably also work on templates (many which are fully protected) because I think I can help out there since I'm a web developer (self-employed, too :) ). I've made a few hundred edits to templates before but it gets annoying when I need to submit an edit protected request for templates that are fully protected and all I want to add is a space where one should be, etc., especially for citation templates, which are pretty much where templates and articles meet. Gary King (talk) 22:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, Keeper, I think I've improved mostly because I hang around more and observe how processes work around here. Hopefully one of my biggest critics, User:SandyGeorgia, agrees at least that I've gotten better at doing things :) Gary King (talk) 22:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: RPP

Yeah - I keep forgetting to check the dates on the create-protection requests. I noticed the dates as soon as I clicked "Submit query" - Apologies. I was about to remove the other one, but noticed you had already declined it. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool, no problem. Just wondering if it was something I was missing :-) Tan | 39 00:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: WP:AIV

I was not sure if the user intentionally deleted the warnings...I sincerely apologize for the confusion. I am still learning the ropes. Willking1979 (talk) 00:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

No, no, I apologized to YOU on your talk page. Your method of just substituting into the template confused me and the username looked like YOUR vandalism. Carry on, and I should stop for the day ;-) Tan | 39 00:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Apology accepted. I was typing my reply to your original message when your apology came in. Willking1979 (talk) 00:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Tabitha,

I will edit the page you deleted but you should know (1) I was not finished (2) it was ment to be a link from the page where he is listed (3) Raymond J. Saulnier was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors to President Dwight Eisenhower.

Peter 68.36.190.225 (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your warning on my talk page

Please refactor your warning on my talk page. I did not delete page contents with no explanation. I had explained everything in the edit summary as well as the talk page here. You've basically been tricked by a revert warrior who was blocked for 3RR on multiple pages including that page. Please stick to dealing with genuine vandalism on WP:AIV. The vandalism report that user:Gulmammad filed is completely bogus. He's claiming that adding tags is vandalism and making edits that were discussed in talk or the edit summary is vandalism. Thanks in advance. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

You might want to check out his recent edits at that very same article he is removing tags without discussion. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 03:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Replied at users talk page. Tan | 39 03:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) Thanks for removing your warning. In response to your concerns of edit warring, I was not edit warring. user:Seraphimblade made the same mistake that you have made. user:Gulmammad was simply reverting my edits and Seraphim tarred us with the same brush. Please see the discussion here at least one admin agrees that I was not revert warring, and Gulmammad received a block for revert warring. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

This is the reply to above comments, first " removing tags without discussion ". What was your explanation when you added those tags to the article which had 10 sources -- almost for each sentences one source? I added 3 more sources and removed tags with edit summary. Then what is wrong in that? And also, this link shows that you have been blocked once on edit warring and unblocked with the following reason: Editor promises to stay away from disputed article(s). You ought to stay in your promise. And, yesterday you weren't reported for only adding tags but manly for your 8 reverts that you did within 19 minutes, see the report. Finally I want to show that you are absolutely giving incorrect information; Seraphimblade hasn't done any mistake and warned you for the following edits/reverts to the article Sheylanli: [4], [5], [6], and [7] Gülməmməd Talk 05:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:71.164.54.219

Looks like you should protect the talk page of the IP you just blocked. Kww (talk) 03:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Good call, thanks. Tan | 39 03:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What are you qualified in?

I see you issuing threats to contributors of Wikipedia - it seems you are some sort of administrator - may I respectfully enquire what qualifies you to monitor contributions, and how did you get this job. You and others like you at Wikipedia remain anonymous, no one seems to know exactly what fields you people are qualified in, yet you reign supreme. This is why I use Wikipedia as a second line of information because there is absolutely no information on its contributors.

Do you care to comment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrwboyd (talk • contribs) 04:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll comment. The Wikipedia community found it proper to promote me to an administrator position. I was endowed with this responsibility by having a thorough knowledge of Wikipedia policy and having proven my high level of responsibility.
Your contribution here, and others like it, are exactly why others also use Wikipedia as a "second line of information". You are adding your own opinion, your own point of view. This is against Wikipedia policy. Can you image if everyone did this? Wikipedia would devolve in a matter of days to complete rubbish. The editors that contribute to Wikipedia are not (by policy) supposed to add their own knowledge or experience. The basis of Wikipedia is not truth, it is verifiability (see WP:V). All additions must be cited by reliable, third-party sources - major publications, historians, respected and published scientists, etc. Therefore, you don't need to know who "we" are - we're just, in theory, adding information that has already been vetted.
Of course, it doesn't always work out this way, and people add uncited trash and their own opinions all the time. We call this a policy violation at best, and vandalism at worst. I am one of the editors who spends a lot of time making sure that Wikipedia policy is upheld.
I hope this helps. Tan | 39 05:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Utterly ridiculous.

An Editor is required to have some knowledge of the subject matter he edits, otherwise he will be unable to edit or monitor in a proper manner. Wikipedia, therefore, employs the services of individuals with unverifiable qualifications, resulting in information that cannot be taken seriously because of its dubious origins from unknown persons without properly accredited qualifications. If one seeks a job as a history teacher, one is required to provide proof of one's training in history; it is as simple as that. You also mentioned truth versus verification - you obviously have little understanding of the terms; that which is verifiable is often considered the truth, although there is much in the Holy Bible which remains unverified yet is considered the truth by Christians. Are you saying that Wikipedia will not accept articles on Jesus Christ? After all much of his life is not historically verifiable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrwboyd (talk • contribs) 05:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

If you cannot understand the fundamental policies of Wikipedia, then I suggest you move on elsewhere. You will not be permitted to assert your opinions here on Wikipedia. Tan | 39 05:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

At Indonesia - phew! SatuSuro 15:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rufus Griscom

Howdy, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rufus Griscom appears to lean towards delete right now. I think one or two sentences added to the article would make the keep arguments the clear consensus. For me the basic problem is the lack of an assertion of notability. The lead does not establish enough context to understand why this person is notable. As such, I theoretically agree with the comment that this article meets the CSD. However, your keep comment indicates that some research shows the person is notable. I think your vote would be the end of it if the article was improved enough to have it no longer qualify for speedy deletion. As I commented on the AfD though, I have no idea what his claim to notability is, and I suspect that is also the main reason others have voted delete.

I realize neither you nor I have any particular reason to keep the article, but I think a quick edit from you clearly stating why he is notable would close the afd as keep. JackSchmidt (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Charles Somerset, 1st Earl of Worcester

I encourage you to take a look at the article now, I ensure you, I have corrected my mistakes, and there is NOTHING wrong with the article now. :) Rbkl (talk) 18:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, because User:DCEdwards1966 cleaned up your mess. Tan | 39 18:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 167.80.244.204

Hello again this is Holtville or as you call me Holt. You did not give me enough time to respond to your question so here is the answer. In the last sentence I meant that if you give someone a FINAL WARNING that means if they do it again then they will be blocked. But, if you give them a final warning after final warning then they will think you are not living up to your word. So they think by you doing this they can keep vandalizing pages and no one can stop them. By the way, there was a level 4 warning and it was given in the January 2008 part of 167.80.244.204's talk page. Holtville (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

They hadn't had a recent final warning, Holt. IP addresses change users - they could be at schools, libraries - even people's home computers change IP addresses sometimes. Therefore, any warning given back in January was almost assuredly not the same user making the edits today. The only warning the person today saw was a level 2 warning. Tan | 39 20:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Explain

Oh shit. I was meaning to report the user whose talk page it was. Don't block me! Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry. I just haven't used huggle in a while (I just got the rollback required for the newest version). I heard of a guy who got one bad Huggle edit, and it was removed, and he was threatened with a block. Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Whoops!

My Apologies. I had thought that he had been given a final warning. I'll be more careful in the future. Cheers, Perfect Proposal Speak Out! 21:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dashboard

After I made a bit of an enhancement to the dashboard (a rollback request section that will appear when there are outstanding requests) I noticed you were using the dashboard in the exact same format as me, so rather than add the enhancement manually, I just changed your dash to a direct transclusion. one, so you can benefit from future enhancements, two, because I need a guinea pig to test if it works well when transcluded directly. Feel free to revert, but let me know how it works in the transcluded form if you don't mind. thanks! xenocidic (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Word up holmes - Tan | 39 22:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thankyou

Thank you for semi-protecting The Sims 3 ElectricalVandilize Me 16:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)