User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Rollback

Thanks for assigning me the rollback tool - I can't beleive how much simpler it makes life! Regards, --TicketMan - Talk - contribs 07:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I too would like to thank you. I see you everywhere here, and to actually be granted something by you is pretty cool. Thanks again Mr little irish^(talk) 08:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

• You're both more than welcome, it does indeed make life easier and I'm quite flattered that anyone would think highly enough of me to think it's cool I granted them rolback! You;re both welcome to stop by any time if you need anything. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN for 2010 Var floods

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

• Talking to yourself, now, are we? Courcelles (talk) 17:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Apparently so! Is that the first or the second sign of madness? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

It's the first. Don't worry though, I do it all the time and I'm fine-ish. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 18:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

That's not very comforting! :S HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I do it too... I just usually don't record it for all the world to see! Courcelles (talk) 18:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, mate!

Thank you for granting me The power! of the reviewer. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. If I'd known you didn't already have it, I would have granted it earlier, but I saw your request and you've popped up on my watchlist enough times to make that very easy one to mark as done! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: WP:AIV (Report against Jdyler)

Hi HJ. Can I just check please - I notice you cleared the "stale" reports out of AIV a few moments ago. Did you take any action against the above user I mentioned? Since he was continually removing CSD templates from articles he made himself, across 4 pages, he broke 3RR on a couple of occasions, was warned on his talk page and given a final warning... The report was filed over 4 hours ago, and doesn't appear to have been acted upon before removal. Could you look at it, please? Cheers, BarkingFish ^{Talk to me} | ^{My contributions} 22:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I did look, but I didn't see anything that unambiguously qualified as vandalism. If I'd seen it when it came in, I probably would have tagged it with {{AIV|M}} because we can't expect new editors to know about things like the 3RR and the pages have been deleted, so a block wouldn't achieve much and could be very bitey.

Btw, I'm sorry to hear you had some troubles with the self-requested block, but I'm glad to see you contributing. I don't suppose you'd allow me to flag you as a reviewer? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Already done, HJ :) MuZemike did it for me in IRC about 3 days ago! I figured rather than moan about PC, since the block got lifted, I may as well do something constructive. As for the AIV report, he may have been a new editor, but after several warnings, surely he'd have noticed the big yellow "You have new messages" thing, realised after reading them that he'd done something wrong, and stopped doing it :) BarkingFish ^{Talk to me} | ^{My contributions} 23:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, fair enough. It's worth a try, I think- I know it's a slippery slope but it's not like we're rolling out full blown flagged revs across the project, just as a form of protection for a few problematic articles. Personally, I think it's a better approach than semi protection where it works and hopefully it'll help us screen out some of the crap that idiots insist on adding here. The AIV report, like I say, it's not unambiguous vandalism and the pages have been deleted. Blocking someone for removing speedy tags from a since-deleted page is a bit like adding insult to injury. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

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

AirplanePro^Radio_Checklist 23:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Issue with Xyz231

I'm at the end of my rope with this guy. He's received three final warnings in the past two days regarding personal attacks and removal of templates without explanation. See this edit for an example of a potential attack (mocking) after the first final warning. I've tried talking sense into him but haven't met with much success. Not sure if a block is the next proper step, but I think it's time for an admin to get involved and I don't want to report him at AIV. Thanks. N419BH 01:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I left them a firm but polite message. Maybe just having an admin weigh in might calm things down a little bit. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I hope so. I'll keep up the WP:AGF for now. N419BH 01:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

• replied N419BH 01:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Bubba the Love Sponge Link

Thanks for looking into this. I am not convinced that this is so much spamming as tenacity, as the editor who is reverting has a history of otherwise reasonable edits for the past year; perhaps they are just a member of the site and like it. Anyway, this gives us a week to present our arguments and discuss, and I do appreciate that. Have a good day! Seaphoto^Talk 01:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey...

It's been a long time since we worked together and I think you should review Breakout (album). Someone already offered but quite frankly I think that to get the article promoted to FA, I'm going to need your help. What do you say? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 02:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it would be my pleasure. :) I'll try to make a start on it later today or tomorrow. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Poke :)

Hello again HJ. I see you're quite busy :D. A few days ago, we conversed on my talk page, and I asked if you could take a look at a few of my GA reviews. Since it looks like you are loaded at the moment, I don't mind if you can't get to it (I'm thinking of submitting an editor review soon, and I can ask there). I do need some help now, though, at a GA review I'm currently working on; it is located at Talk:2010 Showtime Southern 500/GA2. The article is not at GA level at the moment, and I've given some suggestions. I was wondering if you had any more to add? If you're busy, could you refer me to another editor who could help? Thank you, Airplaneman ✈ 04:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Your reviews are on my my to-do list so I'll get to them soon. There always seems to be something else demanding my attention on here or IRL! I'll look at that review later today, though. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Peter Damian

HJ, I just realized I forgot to answer the Peter part of your question when you posted on my talk page about Exoculture. Yes, I did pass on your message. He seemed quite encouraged, because in theory he has an end in sight now to the ban, so long as he does as you suggested. If he wants to try again after a few months, I'm going to suggest he contact you so you can advise about whether it's an appropriate time (if you want to). Thanks again for closing the discussion so thoughtfully. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 13:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Certainly, I'll be happy to. From my interpretation of the discussion, the biggest issue was the socking and the recentness of it, so if he gives the community a chance to forget about that, they might be prepared to let him back in a few months. Hopefully the light at the end of the tunnel will encourage him not to create any more socks and it'd be wise if he'd disclose any he already has. You're welcome, anyway. It's half an hour of my day that hopefully makes a small improvement to the project and to someone else's day. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

RaisedinRotherham

RaisedinRotherham (talk · contribs) looks like the latest in a long line of sock puppet accounts editing entertainment related articles. See User:Adambro/ent v for some of background. The pattern of their edits seems to include making a few genuine edits whilst at the same time amongst those making edits which involve deliberately adding false information into articles. I've therefore extended the block to indefinite. Regards. Adambro (talk) 14:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Can't say I'm surprised. I'll look out for these socks in future! Thanks for the note. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Newb question...

...I saw Patients-First (talk · contribs · count) earlier (I speedied two user pages as blatant attacks, though I suspect you've seen them). I'm guessing, in hindsight, that I should have blocked the editor at that point? TFOWR 14:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I just saw it at UAA and was about to block for the username, then realised they were making a nuisance of themselves so I hard blocked them. I probably would have blocked them for the second attack page, but my trigger finger gets rather itchy around attack pages, so there's nothing wrong with being cautious. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean - I find the attack pages are the first thing I check on the dashboard... I kind of felt since I'd deleted their userpages I was sort of involved, but as I've said before (somewhere...!) I need to toughen up. TFOWR 15:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I love the dashboard! Do you use the script that adds the link to it at the top? It's certainly a handy pile of links. I'm cleaning out the spam category from there atm! Fun! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Guess who's back?

If you don't mind getting the ban-hammer out RandomTime 15:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Pain in the arse! You might want to got to ANI to see if another more competent admin can do a rangeblock. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure how many legitimate editors would be blocked if the whole of 75.47.x.x was rangeblocked, as that looks like the range he's coming from RandomTime 15:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Although, he is very persistent RandomTime 15:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, that's quite a big range. You'd need a CU to check for good editors before getting the banhammer out. Probably best to play whack-a-mole for now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Fairly sure I blocked two of these earlier - one for "not vandalism" edit summaries while WP:VANDing, and one for obviously socking at to remove the original report at WP:AIV. If it helps I'll dig out which IPs...? TFOWR 15:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, seems to be ongoing I put a request here RandomTime 15:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully another admin will be able to make a short rangeblock. Until then, WP:RBI I suppose. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Rangeblock done. Thanks for the help RandomTime 15:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Excellent. Hopefully 12 hours is long enough for him to find something better to do! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Air India Flight 182 for Main Page

Hello there. I recently nominated Air India Flight 182 for the In the news section on the main page, without realizing the poor state of the article itself. I have done some brute reorganizing, but it obviously needs some reference work. Would we be able to put it ITN on the grounds that the exposure would perhaps get some editors to help contribute to it, or does it need to be in better shape to be put up? --Natural R_X 15:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not really my decision. I'm bound by consensus and the consensus at the moment is that the article needs significant work before it can go on. Although the exposure probably would get it improved, the Main Page is a bit like a trophy cabinet, so we only put articles up when they are already good quality. If you spent a few hours tidying, chopping, copy editing and updating, you might be able to get it up to scratch before the the story is too old for ITN. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

That's why I asked, I intend to give it an overhaul and make it fully referenced like my other current work, the Canadian Afghan detainee issue. But I don't have time to do that this weekend, it will be too old by the time I get around to it. A shame, but no matter. Thanks anyway. --Natural R_X 16:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Mayawati

Hi HJ Mitchell. I saw you active at RFPP and although I left a message for TFOWR at their talkpage, but just in case they are busy could you please protect the article per my current RFPP request because a single editor is edit-warring against consensus. Alternatively you can warn the editor Ranjithsutari diff. Thank you. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 16:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Page Move

Hi,

New page patoloing I found INTI International University which looked like a Cut'Paste of INTI International University College - I orriginaly redirected the new to the old, however it looks like it was an attempt at a page move - can you have a look and see - I think INTI International University College should be moved to INTI International University Codf1977 (talk) 16:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. You might want to inform the editor about cut and paste moves for his future reference. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Grains of sand on a beach

There's no point to this. Look at the userrights history. The contribution history. It's spattered throughout. Deleting revisions will just draw attention to the matter. –xeno^talk 16:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I suppose, but if it was me, I'd rather not have it so obviously in the history of my talk page, but if someone really wanted to find that, I suppose they wouldn't struggle. Still, I expect restoring it would only really serve to attract more attention. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Yea, just leave it be - but just keep in mind that some genies won't go back into their bottles. –xeno^talk 16:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:198.163.125.14

Hi, I hope you don't mind, but I extended their block to a week (I was in the middle of doing so when you beat me to it!). I blocked them previously for 3 days and they seem quite persistent, so I don't think there's much risk of a week-long block affecting innocent editors. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, no problem at all. I tend to go along with Huggle's default suggestion on IP's, unless i see it is a school IP. Vandalism so closely aftern an unblock either signals a high-vandalism IP or a persistent (ab)user, and either can use some more time in that case. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN for José Saramago

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, talking to yourself yet again? People shall start to worry (and then they will laugh at the template). - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed! Well Courcelles is apparently in a rush so it falls to yours truly to deliver the credits! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, HJ... and thanks for changing the picture- not quite the way I would have done the templates, though ;) Courcelles (talk) 21:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Overuse of version deletion

I noticed that you used version deletion on some pretty mild vandalism on Talk:Miley Cyrus. I'd rather you didn't do that so lightly. Being able to compare old vandalism to new is an important part of determining whether an IP is a returning vandal (who doesn't need to go through a 4 step warning cycle) or a new one (who does). If trivial vandalism is erased, non-admins can't make those decisions properly.—Kww(talk) 21:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll consider it in future. I personally didn't find that mild and it's not the kind of thing that people want to read, but i suppose that's more of a subjective judgement. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

hey HJ

you got a friend  – Tommy [message] 23:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Nvm, you're quick. Good. :)  – Tommy [message] 23:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I've been called worse thing in my time, but he just lost his talk page access. I also hardened and extended the block so he can't edit even if he logs in. All that just for a vandal reversion on T:MP! I whack the rollback button there twice a day at least and most just go away! Ah well. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Use of RevDelete

Hi. Can you explain why you think these actions were appropriate? Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

See the log summary for the first action. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand. You're trying to suppress the username when it exists as a redirect currently? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You wouldn't find the redirect unless you were looking for it, but if it were my talk page, I wouldn't wouldn't want it there for any passing troll to see just by clicking the history tab. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

It takes (literally) two clicks (not to mention the hundreds of user talk signatures and whatever else). I don't see any indication that the admin cares. Unless there's a back story here, please restore the edit summaries and revisions as soon as possible. Thank you. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You wouldn't find it if you weren't looking for it. I won't restore the revisions, but if you'd care to ask Courcelles without making him feel obliged to do so, he might want to or I'll do so at his request. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand your actions or your rationale.

I've left a message with Courcelles and with another admin, asking for input.

The way I read the Revision deletion policy, there are a very limited set of circumstances in which it's appropriate to redact edit summaries and revision content, and this particular situation doesn't meet any of the criteria.

Thank you for your quick replies. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I would like to hear your explanation of why you felt those deletions were acceptable. If it involves private information, you may email me with the explanation. In particular I would like to know if you received a request to revdelete that information; and as well, if Courcelles has any information that would be helpful to explain these actions, I would like to hear that too. I'll look forward to hearing from you. Risker (talk) 00:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for taking it off-wiki. I'm happy for the "conclusion" to be posted here, but "the bit in the middle", I feel is best handled less publicly, so I've emailed you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Someone pointed out to me that Courcelles removed the information from his talk page with a comment indicating that he had been trying to remove this information from this website. I hadn't noticed that, which is why I got confused about why you'd stepped in and deleted the edit summaries and some of the revision contents (of which there are still a few revision contents not deleted, for what it's worth). The continued existence of the redirect is equally baffling (I imagine that will be rectified in short order). It was really just an indication that Courcelles was actually trying to distance himself from the old name and that it had been accidentally mentioned on his talk page that I was looking for when I made my original post. That isn't to say that it still should have necessarily been deleted, the bell really can't be un-rung as a practical matter, but at least I now understand the underlying rationale. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Sorry for the confusion, I hope you understand my reluctance to go into details on-wiki. I believe Courcelles has since zapped the redirect. I just noticed myself that there are a few revisions I missed, thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Death_of_Jos.C3.A9_Saramago.
Message added 20:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia talk:Reviewing#Automatic granting of "reviewer" bit: (Were your questions 'building' to something or were they merely academic?) –xeno^talk 14:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Purely academic. I was just curious. I've been giving the right out like candy floss, so I just wanted to know the gory details of how it worked. I wasn't trying to prove a point or anything. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Falguni

• Hi,

Would you please review the article?$Max Viwe$ (talk) 08:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Themaxwive, your article was very short and some admin deleted it. Please next time try to write a longer one, at least with two paragraphs. Also, be careful with WP:Notability. Please read it, and it will help you to create good articles. --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 17:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

This was the entire text fo the article: "Falguni and Mrugesh both a Two lives but on Soul." Sorry, but that's a textbook A1- I've no idea what the subject of this article is, and no idea how to continue writing about this with any degree of confidence I'd be writign about the same thing. (I don't care for the A1 tagging four minutes after creation, but that's a tangental point.) Courcelles (talk) 17:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, that's awful. Max, start creating articles about real things, and with subjects ;) --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 18:51, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Diego, where are your manners? Max Viwe didn't create it, anyway- it was created by Onlymrugesh4u (talk · contribs) and tagged by Ttonyb1 (talk · contribs). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

How could I know that? I'm not an admin, and I supposed Max created it ;) --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 19:21, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

E mail

I have sent you an e mail request for comment on an issue. Off2riorob (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Why am I blocked from editing?

I dont know why I have been blocked, I cant edit unsigned or signed in, all I have been doing is updating airline destinations lists to new format as in Dragonair destinations, by the way some one is vandalising Air India destinations article, please check it, thanks.inspector (talk) 15:13, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Inspector. You have not been blocked, however, I see that you have uploaded many logotypes, without an specific fair use rationale. Please read WP:Fair use to make sure you are doing the right thing, or the pictures will be deleted anyway. Greetings, Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 15:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Xyz231

Observe the following, written on his talk page several hours after your warning:

"oh yes, also you never played it, not be part of the PS community. that's another good joke. If what you say is real, let's see which improvements you will make to the article. Xyz231 (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)"

Not sure if it qualifies as a personal attack, but it's definitely fanning the flames in my book. I will now defer to your administrative judgement :). N419BH 17:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

And yet he's still making positive article contributions...grr I wish he'd tone it down on the talk pages. N419BH 17:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Well he seems to have toned it down a little bit, which is a good thing. If you feel attacked, just don't rise to it- don't tell him he's being uncivil, that's like saying "calm down, dear" (it only pisses people off more!)- reply civilly and comment on content, not the contributor as the saying goes and hopefully he'll follow suit. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Koman Coulibaly

Hi. I noticed you restored the wording "for unclear reasons" to the article. We don't generally report a negative especially on a BLP article. Do you think it is important to include this wording? --John (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Not really, I'm afraid I was rather rude and overrode an edit conflict because I didn't want to lose my copy edits. I think something needs to go there- without the "for unclear reasons" it seems to imply he arbitrarily disallowed it, which is a more negative implication than "unclear reasons". Any idea how to better phrase it? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Not at the moment, but I will have a think about it. --John (talk) 20:16, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Brad Pitt

Do you have any evidence that validates your [claim] that my edit was non-neutral other than your own WP:POV of Scientology? I do get a little tired of these claims just because I edit Scientology pages (critics call me a scientologist, scientologists call me a critic, I ask everyone to just please for the love of god back up your edits with WP:RS and they all scream that I am pushing a point of view). I found your edit summery a little bit offhanded and rude and ignorant of wikipedia's reliable source guidelines (the globe and mail is by far not dubious). Now I am a bit more sensitive to these claims so I understand if no ill intent was meant, but please in the future be more cautious and only make such claims when evidence would support such themes (and ambiguous phrasing "might" "could" "possibly" should be avoided as well).Coffeepusher (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I apologise for the edit summary- as you can imagine, Pitt is one of those articles that attracts a lot of drive-by crap, but I should have looked more closely before dismissing it like that. I'm sure Scientology is one of those areas where you'll be accused of POV pushing whatever you do and for exactly that reason, I make a point of not having a POV on the matter. However, I'm not comfortable with the content of your edit. I've seen much worse (you wouldn't believe some of the BLP crap I find myself deleting), but I genuinely don't think such a small mention of something so controversial and inflammatory really merits a mention in the article and I think it's comparable to saying he snorted cocaine in school or experimented with gay sex, but that's a discussion for the article's talk page, really. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your candid apology, and do understand how it happened. Don't worry, I understand that I am new to the Brad Pitt page and there is a community who probably did not appreciate my contribution. I have no intentions of attempting to bypass consensus on this issue, and while I feel it does have merit (for reasons I have already stated on the talk page), a voice of one is hardly a consensus. Again thank you for the understanding of why it hit me so hard (Working with Scientology, Philosophy, and AA tend to be more emotionally draining than you would expect), and I look forward to our future interactions.Coffeepusher (talk) 21:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome, and likewise. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow

Thanks a lot. I'll be careful, I actually was getting along okay with the Twinkle thing and have only been using it to rollback vandalism, which is unfortunately plentiful. I don't mind a well-meaning stalker, it's the other ones I have issues with. I thought I already had autoreviewer, but if not, I'm glad for that too. I don't know how this whole edit reviewer thing is going to pan out, but I can see its benefits as well as its drawbacks. I've come across a handful of articles where it should be working, but for some odd reason, the article isn't semi-protected. Appreciate it. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:48, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I expect it'll sort itself out eventually, once everyone figures out what their shiny new reviewer right does. Rollback is useful for pending changes, though- if you whack it on a pending version, the edit is rejected, so it never makes it to the live version. Like I say, just be careful- keep your head down, no whacking rollback were you shouldn't be etc- and you'll be fine. Always happy to be of service, anyway. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Believe you're BritishEnglish...

Could you possibly explain at User talk:And Rew why it is legitimate to express someone as a citizen of "England" and not just "Britain". He's about ready to get blocked over it. I would explain it myself but I'm not too sure of the details and don't want to sound like an ignorant American...(my apologies). Thanks! N419BH 03:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm English- hence the Cross of St George all over the userpage. I'll see if I can be of assistance! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I took a look and chuckled cause I have done this often. I call people from England "Brits" or "the British", typical American, I know. I think it comes the our schooling as we are taught about "The British are Coming", people grew up during the "British Invasion", and of course hear about the British Broadcasting Corporation....all starting with "British". So we naturally assume that people from England are the "British". Hell, I call everyone from the UK, "Brits"...even though there are Scots and the Irish there too. It is just common misconception of the way we are taught, told and hear. I think User:And Rew needs a quick lesson on the English but not a block. Seems like a confused American to me. :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • 03:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for guiding me. All understood!-- And Rew 03:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind being called British, but I identify myself as English. The thing that bugs me is when Americans fail to leanr the difference between "Great Britain" and the United Kingdom or they confuse the latter with England. They are 3 different things (tell that annoying woman on ABC that) ;). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Apoligies for warning And Rew I was just about to change it to 3RR warning when I saw your note. Personaly I don't care if I am referd to as British or English as long as it's not Scottish or Welsh :-) but that dosn't realy help the matter much.--Wintonian (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• Wait....hold on....Great Britain and England are two different things? Seriously? Oh my achin' head. OK, please learn this misinformed American, cause I am confuzzled. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 03:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can understand, England is like Texas, Great Britain is the name of the Island which consists of Wales, England and Scotland and then the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is like the United States of America.-- And Rew 03:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for that, and my apologies on not knowing better myself. I think the misconception stems from the fact that in the U.S. we refer to ourselves as "Americans" (funny how we claim two continents) and not as residents of our respective state. Wheras in Britain (almost said England there), the home Kingdom carries much more weight and importance. I only discovered that when I was vacationing in London and saw Scotland playing against Wales in 6 nations Rugby (I also discovered Rugby is much more awesome than American Football). Thanks again for the clarification, you learn something new everyday! N419BH 03:41, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Just wait until you start getting in to British Isles, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of course Great Britain,England,Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and some people think Cornwall should be a different country. --Wintonian (talk) 03:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

"Simplify Simplify Simplify" I always wondered what Thoreau exactly meant by this but now I get it. (Just kidding :P)-- And Rew 03:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget the Commonwealth of Nations! And remember, one of the USA's favorite patriotic songs is actually a snub of the British National Anthem N419BH 04:04, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes but they are all independent country’s the Queen is just head of the organisation - we no longer own rule the huge swathes of the globe we gave them all independence. --Wintonian (talk) 04:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

A couple took it (about 13...) N419BH 04:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Your advice is needed...........!

Hello!

It's your talk page stalker back :p

I'm looking for your advice, do you reckon I could edit the lead section of The Bill to say that it's the longest running British police procedural? It's just if you take it from when the pilot (Woodentop (The Bill)) aired, then I'm sure it is. If I can get a reference to back this up do you reckon I could make this change? --5 albert square (talk) 13:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk page stalkers are always welcome here! Now, you want to edit my lovingly crafted lead section? Do you have any idea how much effort I put into that? ;) I'm sure I read something about it being the longest running police procedural (I certainly can't think of one that's run as long as that) so you should be able to dig up a reference for it. Make sure you add it into the body of the article with the reference, then add it to lead. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah the only one I could find that came close was Taggart, but Taggart started airing 1 month after Woodentop was aired so no it isn't. Plus Taggart had quite a notable absence off screen when this whole feud kicked off between STV and ITV (incidentally I think the two sides are still suing each other over The Bill!) and I don't think it classes itself as a police procedural, just a police drama series. Anyway it's referenced and added now, I'm going to nominate it for the On This Day section for October :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You should be able to just add it now to the selected anniversaries for whatever date it is. It's only protected a couple of days before it goes on the MP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Yup, I also nominated Neighbours to appear when it reaches episode 6,000 but it got refused as it already appeared when it reached it's 25th anniversary back in March! Apparently the main page is being clamped down on as people thought favouritism was going on or something. Is there a limit to the number of times an article can appear on the On This Day section? --5 albert square (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not hard and fast, it depends on Main Page balance. Trust me, trying to keep four section in two columns, each of which has its own process, one which changes randomly and one which changes every 6 hours is a lot easier said than done! The average is between 6 and 8 I think. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Well that's it added! Hopefully it will get on :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, been editing one of the Neighbours actors pages today, I cannot believe that this was allowed to lie on his page completely unreferenced. I would've thought that was libellous! --5 albert square (talk) 22:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I've seen much worse, but that's not the kind of thing we need lying around unsourced. You ought to just watchlist all the Neighbours cast so you can scrutinise all the edits to them and prevent that kind of crap getting in in the first place- soap opera actor bios are notorious for fancruft and other crap! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Yup I'm going to do that, I think I have the majority of them on it anyway though. I've just deleted another chunk of his article for the same reason, I did kind of find a reference for it before but it wasn't that good a reference and I just wasn't happy about leaving it on there without a watertight reference. Best to be safe than sorry :) --5 albert square (talk) 23:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Dell Schanze

I was just declining the speedy on the above article with the text: "This is not a negative unsourced BLP so it not a valid G10 (and certainly not an A7). If there are statements that are negative or contentious and unsourced to an RS, remove them. You can take to AfD of course, on the merits." I am not asking you to do anything at all. I just thought you should know that I think this speedy might be better thought.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I spent nearly 15 minutes examining the version prior to the tagging, the history, the previously deleted version and the sources. I agree with your conclusion to a certain extent, but I came to the conclusion that the sourcing was far from ideal- local publications etc, nothing that could be said to be of the utmost reliability, like, for example, The New York Times- and the article dealt with very negative aspects, such as criminal charges, in far more detail than the things for which the subject is supposed to be notable, so I deleted it because it's obviously a severe BLP violation. I also explained my rationale on the creator's talk page if you're interested. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The creator responded. :-) Can we come to some sort of agreement? Restore and AFD, perhaps? Or do we have to DRV first? Since it's clearly a debatable speedy, I'm pretty sure that will end in a restore and AFD, aren't you? --GRuban (talk) 18:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the sources include the oldest newspaper in Utah, and the widest circulation newspaper in Utah. Highly respectable, not tabloids. I'm pretty sure that is in the same family as the New York Times, and certainly of sufficient reliability. If you read the article, you will notice that the criminal charges listed are a major factor in his notability - he blames their coverage for shutting down his business, we can't very well leave that out. --GRuban (talk) 18:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I have to say, I have deep reservations about restoring it. How about a compromise- take it to DRV, and I'll restore the history, but blank and fully protect the page so that participants will be able to see what was deleted? my concern with sources was that they were local sources, rather than well known, highly reputable news organisations like the NYT, but if you read my userpage, you'll realise I have no idea about Utah media. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Deal! Thank you for your civility. BTW, I had no idea about Utah media either - I'm an eastern boy. So, when I was writing the article, I went to our articles about them, to see whether they were respectable or tabloids. They seemed quite respectable, or I wouldn't have used them. I don't know Utah, but I do know about WP:BLP and WP:RS. :-) --GRuban (talk) 18:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, and the "local sources" - if you read about Utah, you're see it's 3 million people mostly living in a single metropolitan area, and surrounded by hundreds of miles of desert. By comparison, New Zealand is 4 million people surrounded by ocean. Surely we wouldn't object to someone because they were "only covered by sources from New Zealand"? --GRuban (talk) 19:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've restored it and protected it so you can file the DRV. Let me know what the template is to stick on the article and I'll add it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. I'm afraid I don't know what "the template to stick on the article" means - the DRV is currently the only entry for today under WP:DRV if that helps. --GRuban (talk) 18:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I've taken care of the templating. Courcelles (talk) 18:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Could you please restore the talk page? --Ronz (talk) 18:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

e-mail

I've sent you an e-mail. I appreciate your help in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vile1870 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autoreviewer

I flagged Floydian, and when I went to mark it as done, your notdone message edit-conflicted me. Do you want me to unflag him? Courcelles (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Nah. More effort than it's worth! :) I trust him, I only declined it because he hasn't created any new articles recently, but those he has are of good quality, so I'm fine with it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Goodl I've went ahead and nowikied your notdone and marked it done for the archival bot- I remember watching him fight through a tough FLC last month, actually. (Some place I need to get a list ready and go back to. Any lists you feel like working on?) Courcelles (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Now you mention it, since I brought Lindsay Lohan up to GA, I wanted to get her discog up to FL, but I struggled with some of the sourcing for chart positions. I'm also still harbouring ambitions for getting Lily Cole up to FA. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... I wonder about that. Per the FL criteria I am sure her discography is long enough for FLC. Of course, this is the only former FL discography I can find that were delisted for length, and not sourcing, and Lohan's is a little longer than that one. That one turns on sourcing, and it is woefully incomplete... it would eb quite a challenge. Courcelles (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Everything else is there, but not sources. It's the opposite to my usual style of gathering every source I can find and somehow building an article out of it! You up for a challenge or are you looking for something a little less complicated? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Always! I've been tinkering with List of Olympic medalists in volleyball and 1980 Winter Olympics medal table, but the sources are plentiful and readily available- they are truly just a matter of doing the work. (Well, and figuring out where that extra silver medal came from for the 1980 one). Some more challenging fare could be fun. Courcelles (talk) 21:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! It'll be interesting, but I reckon between us we might be able to get it up to scratch. Btw, I just saw that AN thread where you blocked that ban-evading IP. That's hilarious! Nicely done! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I think I just got snookered into editing a music article! Not 36 hours after telling someone on my talk page that music was perhaps the field on WP I knew the least about regarding notability. (Of course, that might be due to the fact that, in my mind, if you're not as good as these guys, what's the point?) If I can help June get an FLC through about a movie I've never seen, I guess this fits my pattern perfectly. Courcelles (talk) 03:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay if I put in a plug for the list of bow tie wearers?--~TPW 03:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

There's "needs a couple weeks' work and some luck to get a star" and then there's bloody impossible. Though if List of 1920s jazz standards can get through FLC, perhaps the bow tie one could as well. (Don't get me wrong- the Jazz list is a fabulous list; but whenever you have that "incomplete list" template, you're setting yourself up for tons of work before and during an FLC.) Courcelles (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

List of bow tie wearers? How on Earth is that not indiscriminate? And how are you setting some sort of inclusion criteria? Is anyone who's ever worn a bow tie on it or what? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI

User_talk:Huey45#WT:DGAF I hadn't realized you'd given him a final warning already. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 03:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

For quick reference, click here. I can see where he is coming from, but attacking editors isn't appropriate. He seems to be making some good contributions, however. Davtra (talk) 03:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Recent protection request

You sensibly declined this:

Trojan Genealogy of Nennius (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Indefinite semi-protection. vandalism Nate5713 (talk) 01:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You might want to have a look at my talk page and at what he's trying to do there (claim a myth is historical) [1]. He's doing this every day. Dougweller (talk) 05:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

RE:SN

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

--Alex ^discussion 13:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You might want to consider blocking Heymid

Hello again,

Despite the permanent block at SVWP and despite your advice to keep his head down and out of trouble, the Heymid account has started removing messages from other people's talk pages [2] [3].

I honestly believe blocking the account would save you guys a looot of time and energy. Sure, you should perhaps warn him, but that approach was pretty fruitless at SVWP, where he would just apologize and find new ways to waste our time.

- Tournesol (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

He just can;t keep out of trouble, can he? I'll keep an eye on him. Thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

RfA

Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson#Your Request for Adminship which you are, of course, very welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion log

Somthing is broken with the tool you use for deletion. The files I listed at User talk:Hentzer was not transfered to Commons but tagged as unambiguous copyright violations. --Martin H. (talk) 18:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You're quite correct, I was trying to empty some of those tagged for speedy as F8 (of which there were about 150) and thought I'd checked them all before I hit delete, but apparently I didn't look closely enough. Apologies. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted because "WP:F8- media file available on Commons"

I am curious on why these two images were deleted. The deletion log says that the file exists in commons, but I am unable to find it. Now that the files are deleted, the pages which included these images are now broken. Can you please correct the articles to have the correct image links?

• File:800px-Map-Chinese Characters.png
• File:George-winterton-1-.jpg

--Sreejith K (talk) 18:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I restored the first since the Commons version appears to be a different file. The second was copyright violation of this website and was tagged as such, so my log summary was incorrect (see the section above). Apologies, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:Reviewing Archive Question

On the newly minted page WP:Reviewing, User:Dabomb87 attempted to archive a large swath of information calling it "stale", while some of it could be, I think some wasn't and reverted. While he does have a point, I took at a look at the MiszaBot is only expected around to archive every 120 days. I don't feel comfortable tinkering with the bots, so I was wondering, could you change it from 120 to 30 days? That seems a big more reasonable and gets long stale discussions off the page quicker. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, looks like Dabomb87 was BOLD and changed it, so I don't think there is anything left to be done. :) Take Care...NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not getting involved in meta discussion over talk page archiving, but the MiszaBot configuration at the top has a parameter called: |algo = old[number of hours or days], so you can just change that to the number of hours or days you want. For example, on my talk page it's currently |algo = old(60h). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, makes sense. I didn't know how, hence my not feeling comfortable. Just a clarification, it wasn't on Meta, but here on en.Wiki. This is resolved though almost as quick as I wrote it. :) Have a Good Night. :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)