User talk:Od Mishehu/Archive12

Missing information

If you know that Anoplotherium is an even-toed ungulate, why don't you put that in the article, and cite a source for it?

And if you don't know, why are you stub-sorting it that way? Gene Nygaard (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Never mind. I see all of Order Artiodactyla are even-toed. Gene Nygaard (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Image closure

Re your FFD closure of File:Thomas Youngblood at Monsters of Rock 2007 in Zaragoza, Spain.jpg: you were faster than me here :-) Unfortunately this appears to be a copyvio. The same file was also uploaded as File:Thomas Younblood at MOR 2007.jpg, where the uploader declared it to be somebody else's work ("Author= Francisco Serralvo") [1]. This uploader has a checkered upload history [2] and had several images from similar sources deleted as copyvios.

What do we do next; would you be prepared to just change your closure, or would you prefer a new process? Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. I saw no such claim there. If anyone had suggested it, I wouldn't have closed it. I'm willing to rollback my closure if you want, but with the discussion as it stands - I wouldn't close it in any other way. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, the closure was correct as such, no blame at all. I only found this right now while considering closing it myself. If you don't object, we can of course also simply F9-speedy it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no objection to you performing such a deletion, but I won't do it myself (I don't handle most image CSDs). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, looking a bit further, it turns out the photographer is probably the official promotional photographer of the production company, and the uploader may be related to that company according to their username and editing profile, so it might in fact be legit. I'm giving them an opportunity of clarifying, {{di-no permission}}. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of the word 'fuck'

Hi - I noticed that you recently deleted the redirect The word 'fuck'. The reason this redirect existed is because it was the original location for the article now found at fuck: the article was created on 26 December, 2001 but only moved to its present location (by me) on 8 April 2003. It is quite possible that other websites linked to that original article location; those links will now be broken.

When I edited here regularly (some years ago), it was normal to keep redirects such as this one in order to avoid external broken links. Is there now a general policy to delete them, and if so, why? I ask because I am not sure what is gained by the deletion, but can see that something is potentially lost. Regards--Camembert (talk) 18:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I deleted this redirect based on this discussion, where it's clear that this is what the community thinks should be done. I did close it a bit early, but I don't see any reason to think that this would have changed the result - even you didn't notice it until 36 hours later, by which time it would have been deleted anyway. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was wondering about general policy rather than what you did in this specific case. I'm not saying that you did anything wrong - as you say, you merely implemented the decision that came out of the discussion; it's not your job to check if that discussion is based on a misconception. I do think it may have been, though; I think people believed that the word 'fuck' was the same sort of redirect as the word fuck, which it wasn't: the former was the result of a page move over six years ago, while the latter was a (relatively) recent redirect created for no obvious reason at all. Now that I've looked into the policy, points 1 and 4 of WP:RFD#KEEP seem relevant.

It does seem to me that the redirect ought to be undeleted. Perhaps I should just list it at Wikipedia:Deletion review (unless you have any better ideas). --Camembert (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion Review does seem to be the right way to go. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Basketball head coaches

Hi! Per your closure of the basketball head coaches CfD, I've copied the list of categories to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual. There's no bot currently that can handle multiple merge targets, is there? I'll try to help out some if it has to be done manually. It might be a good idea to talk to the bot ops, though – it does seem like an operation that should be handled by bots. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 10:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that this is what this section of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual was intended for - it's intended for category splitting. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Really? It just says "Categories whose contents are to be merged to two or more destinations"... Jafeluv (talk) 13:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Minneapolis Lakers

I saw you deleted it because you thought it was a college team. They were actually a pro team and is now the LA Lakers. Please revert accordingly.--Levineps (talk) 05:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've deleted a whole lot of categories. Can you please give me a red link to the category you're referring to? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

NP, Category:Minneapolis Lakers head coaches--Levineps (talk) 14:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Looking through the nomination, I see that this category is listed there. I see no mention in the discussion that this may be an exception - the nomination refers to this one as much as the others. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Filipino cats

Sorry I added some of the Filipino cats from my nomination to process. I didn't realise you were still working on them—I thought you might have missed them or been called away by something. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Alva Noe

You should not have deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alva_noe&action=edit&redlink=1 See german http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alva_No%C3%AB Also see numerous references to this philosopher's name on other English Wikipedia pages Alva Noe's page should be restored. Sorry if this is not the right way to format my request Warrbo (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I see no incoming links on English Wikipedia. I don't understand German, so I can't get any idea from the Grman article whether or not it's any good; I have, however, asked an admin here who does speek German for an opinion. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Do a quick search of the English Wikipedia for "Alva Noe"- all of the hits are him. Enactivism(psychology) and consciousness studies. There may be no incoming links but there are plenty of pages that could have them added. Warrbo (talk) 20:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

note also alternative spelling "Noë"Warrbo (talk) 20:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You should have looked at Google Scholar and carried out WP:Before before making this nomination. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC).

The Unbeatables / Masters of the Double Skies

Hi there, thanks for your note to me as well as helping me remove the "Unbeatables III" page so that I could do the move for that pair. As you can tell, I'm a little confused with the DB-move as its the 1st time I'm using it. So if I actually want the page moved back to Unbeatables, and with Masters of the Double Skies as the redirect page, I should be using the db-move template on the Unbeatables page as it is now (since it is currently the empty redirect page)? Zhanzhao (talk) 16:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You should be able to do the moves yourself. If you can't - then yes, you should put a {{db-move}} on the redirect. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your assist in this! Zhanzhao (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Philippines–Romania relations has been nominated for deletion again here

You are being notified because you participated in a previous Afd regarding this article, either at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Argentina–Singapore_relations or at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippines–Romania relations, and you deserve a chance to weigh in on this article once again. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Kindly restore...

User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson/pt. Thank you. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 16:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done. For your information, please note that the correct way to protect non-existent pages is directly, not using cascade protection; and that all 3 of the pages transcluded there are all protected. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

SS Stettin

Hi, I've come across this website which appears to have some info on SS Stettin in Hebrew (I think). The number of 5270090 is an IMO Number, not a Lloyd's register number. What I'm particularly looking for is a yard number (1511?), speed (9½ knots?), launch date and date of completion. Does this website have any of that info? Mjroots (talk) 23:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Just spotted at the bottom of the page there appears to be a history section, Israel Gotesman is mentioned. Did this ship sail under the Israeli flag at some point? Mjroots (talk) 23:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Question

I saw this edit. Could you please explain to me what it is for? I read the text on Template:Pollutedcat, but did not uderstand. And frankly, I am not happy with the idea of adding things to maintenance categories. So I would be happy if you could explain to be the reason for that template and how it works. Debresser (talk) 10:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

What it means is that the category is allowed to contain both user pages (pages in the User: and User talk: namespaces) and pages in the article namespace, so it shouldn't be listed on Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted categories. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree it is, but why does that mean it has to be listed there. What is that category about, what is it for, and why is it needed? Debresser (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Message?

Sorry, I've just noticed that there was a message on my User page saying that there was a message for me on your page on 26 January, but I can't see it. Opbeith (talk) 23:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it got archived at User talk:Od Mishehu/Archive11#Bosniak. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I'm afraid I'm a bit slow at getting round to things at times. Opbeith (talk) 08:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Advice

Thanks It's good to get constructive criticism. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• Today I made several nominations—more than you mentioned at my talk, but several less than the last time. I hope this is manageable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Seems fine to me - I see a total of 28 nominations for the day (1 was speedy closed within the first hour), which is much more manageable than the 91 we had the previous round. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleting my page

I'm not sure if im replying on the right section of your page or not but I am curious as to why you deleted MY page. It was not a public page, it was under my own name.

I think you want me to copy this into here 08:57, 4 March 2010 Od Mishehu (talk | contribs) deleted "User:Redsox42311/Shaycarl" ‎ (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Redsox42311/Shaycarl) This discussion

I read why it was deleted and you said it was an article which had been deleted 10 previous times. Well maybe it has, but I didn't do that, other people may have tried to add it as a public article. So when I talked with user:PMDrive1061 he told me that I could put it under my page as a sandbox. So I did. I'm not a pro on wikipedia, so its difficult to create the articles and it takes time and now that is completely gone, I will have to start from scratch again. So I'm wondering if you can give my anymore information, and also, why didn't I know about that talk about (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Redsox42311/Shaycarl)

From reading the talk, it seems like the page was public, so that was a problem about notability, but I thought the whole point of putting it on there was because it didn't have notability. Is there any way to work on an article which is private, because other wise, it seems near impossible to just put up an article from scratch without being able to slowly work on it before it goes public.

Thanks, Redsox42311 (talk) -18:07, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I deleted it because it appears to me that the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Redsox42311/Shaycarl was to have it deleted. If you disagfree, feel free to take it to deletion review. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 23:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, is there another area where you can create things like this to work on, or another site that you can work on a page. Since wikipedia uses a different code for creating articles, is there someplace to make an article and store it there while you are working on it, either on wikipedia or an external site. Thanks, Redsox42311 (talk) 8:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, there's just the personal sandboxes in one's own userspace. Please also note that I see no attempt of yours to edit User:Redsox42311/Shaycarl after you copied it into yur userspace. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought I did some work on it a couple weeks ago. Is the personal sandbox, where I had the article? Redsox42311 (talk) 5:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I (as well as any other admin) can see all deleted versions of pages. I see that on January 25th at 00:29 UTC you made what looks like a copy of the article (yes, I could check that out, but it would be more complicated), and haven't touched it since. It's possible that you edited it anonymously; some one did, and I have no way to know your IP address; however, your account didn't edit it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok sorry Redsox42311 (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Category:Requests for unblock

Hi Od Mishseu

I dunno if you had noticed, but the discussion at CfD March 13 of your proposal to rename Category:Requests for unblock is turning into a pile-on oppose. (That's life: what seems like a good idea isn't always seen that way by others.)

Anyway, if I hadn't commented my self, I'd close the discussion early per WP:SNOW. Some other admin may do that, but if not I wanted to suggested that since the proposal is going nowhere you might like to withdraw the nom by self-closing the discussion. No pressure, just a suggestion.

Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I was actually thinking of it, but I hadn't seen the nomination between when the votes started piling in and when this statement was made. I wasn't sure that I could do it (according to Wikipedia:Speedy keep, it can be done if there are "zero remaining arguments for deletion or merger"), but I trust your judgement on this question. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I have to confess that I hadn't read Wikipedia:Speedy keep for a while, but I don't think it clashes ... because this nom was closed as "withdrawn" rather than "keep". Anyway, if there are objections, it's all my fault, tho I don't think that's likely. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:AN#Review of indefinite rangeblocks. I realize you just tweaked the block, figured you might want to lend any input anyway. –xeno^talk 17:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Fishkill Supply Depot

I am curious why the Talk:Fishkill Supply Depot page was deleted when the article page Fishkill Supply Depot remains? I have never seen this before and I would like to learn the rationale for deleting a talk page while its article page remains. Seems to me the thing to do might have been to just remove whatever text was deemed as unworthy on the talk page and not delete it. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

It had only one author, who subsequently blanked the page in a context where it appears that it is no longer of any relevance. See the 7th general criterion for speedy deletion. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:32, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I am familiar with G7, it's just that I have never seen it applied to a talk page before. This is interesting because I thought I had added some text to the talk page shortly after the article was first created, when I patrolled it. Perhaps someone had deleted that text. Which raises an interesting question: If an editor deletes all the text on a talk page except for text that they added, and then later blanks out their text, is that reason to delete it under G7? Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 21:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure; I would think that if they both appear to want the page deleted, then the answer is yes. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Awarded to Od Mishehu for his quiet, but devoted work in finding and relisting old FFD nominations which have bee erroneously removed by a bug in twinkle. Keep up the good work!! -FASTILY(TALK) 23:04, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Od Mishehu. You have new messages at Talk:Annabeth Chase (Percy Jackson).
Message added 20:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

PrincessofLlyr (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Cfd full

Do you plan to move the documentation of Cfd to Cfd full as well, or will you make new documentation? Debresser (talk) 05:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

CFD and soft redirects

Hi Od Mishehu

I have been meaning to post a quick msg to you to congratulate you on the heroic number of CFD closures you have been doing lately. Great work!

But instead I'm posting because I set out to fix a mix-up over soft-redirects, but have created another one :( First my confession on what happened, then a suggestion for a solution.

What happened

I was checking WP:CFD/W to check that no categories had been merged onto soft redirects, and found that this was just what had happened to the CfD Feb 25 renaming of Category:Black and white films to Category:Black-and-white films, so I fixed that. So far so good.

I then thought that it would be a good idea to check the various sportspeople-by-century categories, and found that some of the Feb 25 Martial artists categories had been merged to Category:Martial artists, which was a soft-redirect to Category:Martial arts practitioners ... so, thinking that the bot was moving all the practitioners to artists, I copied the text of Category:Martial arts practitioners to Category:Martial artists, making it a proper category.

That was my mistake, doubly so, because a) Feb 25 Martial artists had set the soft redirect as a merge target, and b) the wider renaming of Category:Martial arts practitioners to Category:Martial artists is still open for discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_2#Martial_artists. So I had jumped too soon.

However, the categories which had been merged into Category:Martial artists all seem to have been container categories ... so the only contents of the category currently is Category:Irish martial artists, which is a consequence of me again not checking for redirects when adding {{fooian fooers}} to that category. I'm going to leave Category:Irish martial artists, because it'll sort itself out in two days once the renaming is complete (there's 100% support so far for the renaming), and the bot doesn't handle {{fooian fooers}}. Does that sound OK?

Anyway ... the wider issue here is that Cydebot evidently doesn't check whether its merge or rename target is a soft redirect.

That could have been a big problem with the renaming of Category:Black and white films to Category:Black-and-white films, because if a soft-redirect-patrolling bot had found them, 11,000 pages would have been moved back again ... but it's a wider problem, because I can envisage all sorts of unintended consequences arising from this sort of thing.

Solution?

Obviously, part of the solution is for a CFD nominator not to repeat my mistake of listing a soft redirect as a merge target, but with a large group nomination it's too easy for that to happen. (I usually check very carefully, but some slip through).

I'm also wary of throwing responsibility for this sort of check onto the CFD closer: there is too much to do when closing, and it seems like an unfair burden. So I thought of asking Cyde to see if the bot could be easily tweaked to simply ignore any moves or merges to soft redirects. That way they would simply be stuck on the queue, and those of us monitoring WP:CFD/W would eventually check and spot the problem.

What do you think of that? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I see 2 solutions - the one you presented; and for the bot to treat soft-redirects as non-existent categories (i.e copy from source category). I prefer the first (I almost never ask the bot to create my categories in CfR closures). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I also prefer the first, because it triggers human intervention. The second one sounds attractive at first glance, but it could have unintended effects of the soft redirect was to something different. (BTW, isn't it hard to avoid having the bot create categories? Renames are treated the same as merges, and every rename is effectively a delete-old-and-create-new exercise)

I'll drop a line to Cyde and see what he thinks. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the very belated followup, but I have now left a note about this at User talk:Cyde#CFD_and_soft_redirects. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Cydebot change

Just figured I should drop you a note to keep you up to date on the latest Cydebot update. See User talk:Cyde#CFD and soft redirects for the details on the change. --Cyde Weys 19:59, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Adrienne Papp.jpg

I have removed the {{ffd}} tag you placed on File:Adrienne Papp.jpg. I did this because you didn't create a discussion for this image, and I can find no evidence of the reason. If you still think it should be deleted, feel free to renominate it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Same with File:Afiche refugio web.jpg. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea - as you can see by looking at User talk:Carnevale several files were listed and deleted. For whatever reason the files you mention were never added, but should be deleted. Clearly File:Afiche refugio web.jpg has the wrong license, should be used under fair use - however it is unused. And also if you look at User_talk:Logicbutton you can see that on November 1, 2008 the Adrienne_Papp article was put up for deletion, and it was deleted. On November 19, 2008 I tagged File:Adrienne Papp.jpg as an orphan. The article was recreated on May 7, 2009. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

These files aren't my problem. If you still think they should be deleted, feel free to renominate them. I was merely informing you of something which I think you would want to know about. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

>>>These files aren't my problem.<<< They aren't mine either - but YOU made them your problem by posting on my talk page, but not doing any sort of background on why they were nominated in the first place. As YOU said "I can find no evidence of the reason" I merely offered you the reason they were nominated in the first place since you seemed very interested in them all of a sudden. Soundvisions1 (talk) 03:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I've relisted File:Afiche refugio web.jpg for deletion. If you like, you can contribute to the deletion discussion. As for File:Adrienne Papp.jpg, since it seems to be a freely licensed image, I've just added it to the Adrienne Papp article. —Bkell (talk) 12:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

My Password

Can you please E-mail me my password for User:A1DF67 again? That password doesn't work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.166.182 (talk) 05:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Just go to the page for logging in, type your user name in the appropriate box, and click on the "E-mail new password" button underneath. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:21, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia:Books

Hello, Od Mishehu. You have new messages at Black Falcon's talk page.
Message added 04:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I responded at my talk page. Cheers, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

User-0 templates

Thanks Twinkle does that sometimes (I'm more careful to check these days.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:44, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Upon the deletion of La Haye Global University for Journalism and Media

Hi, I have created the La Haye Global University for Journalism and Media since all other not recognized universities from the Netherlands have their own English Wikipedia pages. I see no reason for ostracizing this organization from Wikipedia, since formally it does not differ from the other three non-recognized Dutch universities which have their own Wikipedia page. I have clearly stated that this university is not recognized by the Dutch state, this was not an attack, but rendering true and verifiable information. If I were a student seeking admission at a certain university, first thing I would want to know about it were if such university is accreditted or not, if it is recognized or not by the state wherein it lies. Its page has been already deleted, but perhaps we could agree upon a version of this page which could be published within the English Wikipedia. Please say what I should include inside this page. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The fact that it's an unrecognized university doesn't make it important or significant. If you create a new version of La Haye Global University for Journalism and Media, I promise you that I won't delete it, although someone else may. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:35, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.

...for catching that. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 11:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it was caught at the end of Wikipedia:Database reports/Indefinitely blocked IPs. A quick look at the block log and user talk page made it clear what you meant to do. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Aboitiz Football Cup

I disagree with your assessment of the application of CSD A7 to Aboitiz Football Cup. It seems to me that a sports competition could be classed as an organisation, and would therefore be eligible for deletion under CSD A7. Thoughts? – PeeJay 13:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that A7 should be defined narrowly, and that a competition isn't an orginization. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Screwed up CfD

Thanks Sometimes, Twinkle does not complete CfDs, such as at Category:Politicians from Åland, which was intended to be part of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_16#.C3.85land. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Explanation

According to Magioladitis, who is an admin:

You are not allowed to solely change otheruses4 with about and this is because this is a very minor edit. Page layout is serious stuff

— Magioladitis (talk) 23:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

How did I violate anything? I am entitled to an explanation.174.3.123.220 (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

1. Every time you edit a page, you are taking up a certain amount of system resources from Wikipedia. The amount of resources used to handle a redirect is much less (hunderds times, I believe) than the amount of resources used in a single edit.
2. Every revision of Wikipedia takes up storage space; unnecessarily removing redirects does just as much as any other edit.
3. Should a user go looking for when a specific change was made to the page, your edit of bypassing the redirect gets in his/her way.
4. You appear to have been trying to create a situation where you first orphan a template redirect, then say it should be deleted because it's orphaned.

I hope these explanations help you understand why it's not a good idea to bypass redirects. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Dfatwp

Just letting you know that this editor undid the redirects for Image for Windows, BootIt Next Generation and TeraByte Unlimited resulting from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TeraByte Unlimited, apparently applying the "whoever has most time their hands, wins" wikirule. Pcap ping 23:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

CASBAA

Hi Od Mishehu, I was just about redirecting CASBAA to Cable & Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia, but then recognized, that you had deleted CASBAA in september 2009. So you may now want to take a second look? Best, Mentalmoses (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done. For your information, it's usually not a problem to redirect a title to an existing article, unless the deletion reason is either a redirects for deletion discussion, or CSD R3 (unlikely typo/misnomer). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Populated places

Just curious: Do you want to handle all these "populated places" renames by yourself (+ bot), or would you like help? If the latter, let me know. If the former, I'll just add my support when needed.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to do them at a manageable pace; there was already one case of a misnaming done due to not noticing a small detail - Category:Arctic populated places of the United States; I'm doing it slowly to avoid such potential issues. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Works for me. Let me know if you change your mind.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Templates

Thanks I had some problems with Twinkle. At the time, I had just installed it--but I know better know. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You may want to look at the end of Wikipedia:Database reports/Old deletion discussions, which is where I found these. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

You are receiving this note because of your participation in WT:Revision deletion#Community consultation, which is referred to in Wikipedia:VPR#Proposal to turn on revision deletion immediately (despite some lingering concerns). –xeno^talk 14:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Cydebot deletion summary issues

I've made some changes to Cydebot that should address the deletion summary issue (specifically, the lack of a correct link to the per-day discussion page in some instances). Please keep your eyes peeled for any remaining issues. More information is here. --Cyde Weys 21:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Ping ... I've responded on my talk page to the issue of Cydebot having some hiccups over night. --Cyde Weys 14:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

First time closing an SFD

Hi, this was my first attempt to close two stub discussions (April 11 and April 13). Hopefully I followed all the steps. Let me know if I missed something so I don't repeat the same mistake again. Closing TFDs is much easier. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks good to me. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

re: Darryl0173

You can give him IPBE. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Category:English engineer stubs

Greetings! I see you have recently created one or more new stub templates or categories. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types be proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. This helps to reach consensus about whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries, where comments are welcome as to any rationale for this stub type. Please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Dawynn (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't create it - I just made sure that the category fit our standard, being populated by a template. I forgot to go and report this at the discoveries page; I did, however, see that there are at least 60 stubs for this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Populated places CfD question

I'm asking the people in the Consensus? section of the "Populated places" discussion about a key point that has created some division in this giant nomination. When you were reaching this consensus, did you think "Cities and towns" categories (not "Cities, towns, and villages") should have been part of the changes? If you have an opinion on this, please comment at the nomination.--Mike Selinker (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You got my hopes up with this edit summary...

...sadly, they were dashed when I saw what you were actually suggesting here! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 13:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

This was a followup to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 May 31#Category:Professorships in Philosophy. What were you expecting when you saw my edit summary, and what's wrong with my rename proposal? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

You accidentally put "seedy" rather than "speedy", that's all. Nothing wrong with the proposal itself, of course. Bencherlite^Talk 15:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Category:Rouge admins

You are correct in that the category was deleted at CFD a couple of years ago. One of the jokes of having the category on one's userpage is that it is a redlinked page. Could you please revert your removal of it from several people's user page? Thank you, NW (Talk) 13:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

To the best iof y understanding, if a category has been deleted, it isn't to bre used. If there is some place where you can show a concensus which says otherwise (either for categories in general, or for this one in particular), then I will do it. Otherwise, if you think it should be done, start a discussion about it and inform me of the location. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

There was never really a consensus either way[3][4], but I saw the discussion (especially the first one) more of leaning towards "it's not a big deal if people have it on their userpage, and it's kind of funny to have a red-linked rouge admins category as well". NW (Talk) 15:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Relisting Category:Pan-Unicode typefaces

Could you specify why you relisted this? To me it's more like a not controversial thing. -DePiep (talk) 23:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't. This edit isn't relisting - it's merely making sure that the CfR tag links to the correct discussion. The admin who relisted it was ξ^xplicit, and I believe that the reason is that it's standard procedure for CFDs with no comments or votes other than the nominator's. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

And for your information, to link to a category, please use [[:Category:name]], not [[Category:name]]. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand, it's OK your way. Thank you. And I'm sorry for disturbing this page by wrongtyping the category-link. -DePiep (talk) 20:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)