User talk:Hut 8.5/Archive 4
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Note that if you want to retrospectively alter your signature, retarget a redirect or other really trivial change I don't really care. Hut 8.5 21:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jeff Wolverton. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 74.222.153.11 (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jeff Wolverton. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 74.222.153.11 (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Jeff Wolverton
- Jeff Wolverton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore|cache|AfD)
This article's deletion has been already overturned by Shimeru on 00:46, 27 December 2006 on the grounds that 'He's credited with writing (and voice acting in) an Oscar-winning animated short. That's sufficient notability, despite the CoI. Article isn't so hot, but he should meet WP:BIO.' Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_December_24 Additionally, in the intervening time since the overturned deletion the subject's name has appeared three times in movie theaters (in the credits of 'Spider-Man 3' & 'Ghost Rider' for effects work and for voice acting in another theatrically released ChubbChubbs short.) Additionally subject's name appeared in both Variety and Hollywood Reporter during that time. Seems unlikely this would make him LESS notable than when the deletion for WP:BIO was originally overturned. 74.222.153.11 (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
About my changes in an article (car import company)
Hello, you welcomed me to the english Wikipedia a few months ago. After having made only a small change to the article AMAG Automobil- und Motoren a month ago, I recently realized that what I wrote was unprecise (in fact not quite correct). To put more precision I added some more material. English being a foreign language for me, I'd appreciate if someone would comment on my changes. Best would be someone who has experience on company articles, especially if possible on automobiles. (The company is the one I'm still working for, I'll be retired in a few months.) --UKe-CH (talk) 12:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
A Barnstar award for you!
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| I award you this Barnstar, Hut 8.5 for removing the vandalism on my talk page. You deserve it! Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! The Helpful One (Talk) (Contributions) 13:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC) |
AFD
Hi Hut 8.5, thanks for closing this discussion. Previously, I closed it but I think, I was too fast.Thank you--NAHID 16:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks a lot for being supportive to me. Though Mets501 didn't give me any explicit permission but it is quite clear that he wants other to create userbox on that UBX space so that all the userboxes can be found in a single place. Other people has also taken his initiative in my way and created lot's of userboxes there. I found Mets501 initiative a good one and just followed what others did. But now, it became a debatable issue! Though it's a pointless debate, still I requested Mets501 to express his view regarding this issue. Hope that will end the debate, at least for the time being. Thanks very much once again. Cheers. - Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 19:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hut, thanks for contributing to the effort to keep this article within WP:BLP standards. The fellow who continues to revert (not only reinstating the unsourced sexuality content but reversing a number of uncontroversial style edits as well) keeps popping up under different IPs, having apparently given up user names, most of which seem to have been blocked in the past. Pls note he also keeps hitting Bruce Mansfield and one or two others. I wonder if protecting these pages might be the best option for now? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hunter Ice Festival
Was about to add this to the discussion;
- InformationJust to draw everyones attention to the Talk page [[1]] for this discussion where the original author Lisacroteau has posted, s/he does not seem to understand too well how this works. Not sure I understand entirely what is being said but this seems to be a claim that Lisacroteau is also the author of the referenced work cited for copyvio. If that is showm to be true, would it still be a copyvio? Lisacroteau may have created the Wikipedia article first.
when the page got speedy deleted before I could. Don't know whether it makes any difference or not but just in case it does I am passing my thoughts on to youSpinningspark (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR
| Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
|---|
|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "F"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "G"s, and "H"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Dinosaurs
I have not reverted any links or accessed this page, but my nine year old son has. Sorry.
Streona (talk) 00:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me! |
-Djsasso (talk) 17:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
N.N.H.S.
why was this page deleted for a "personal attack"? I was not attacking or attempting to demean anyone or any kind of organization. The N.N.H.S. is an actual collection of people, just as the National Honor Society is. Think about it, COULD there be one without the other? it's just not possible. I did not say anything personal or use any names at all aside from the gentleman who was actually historically responsible for the creation of both the NHS, and (by defult) the NNHS. also the celebrities who I mentioned were NOT IN NATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY... just as I stated.
This deletion does not make any sense to me...
Robert Fletcher Article
The page 'Robert Fletcher' was deleted on January 8th. I would like the content back so to place on a purchased website space. The content of 'Robert Fletcher' had been upkept for over a year and the information is unlisted on any other resource. Please can you cut and paste the page onto my user profile if you have access to it? Many Thanks if you can. Bobbyfletch85 (talk) 09:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
RfR
Please see Wikipedia:Requests for rollback#User:Dadude3320, and User talk:Dadude3320#Imaginationland Merge. Prodego talk 18:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Schools and A7
Sorry for having proposed speedy deletion of the same article (Brandon School (Goleta, California)) twice with the same criterion: using Twinkle, I was under the impression they were different criteria. But I do not understand why schools are not a particular kind of organizations or companies. And even in that case, how do you speedy non-notable "stuff" (say, an appliance, a fictional character or whatever)? Thanks, Goochelaar (talk) 10:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Goochelaar (talk) 10:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you SO much.
I'm so glad you warned off that "Chair54321" vandal. That attack he made was one of the most heartless I'd ever seen and I've since removed my comment. I'd also like to thank you for not slapping my wrist with a "no personal attacks" warning. May your mop and bucket never falter. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- You got it, bro. Looks like he's called it quits for now. I have to as well. Getting late here, so I'll bid you good night as well as to give you my thanks once more. See you! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
PMDrive1061 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Indefinite block stats
Thanks for that! I've replied over there. May I ask what analysis program you are using? Carcharoth (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I's a Python program I wrote specifically. --Hut 8.5 22:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Some comments here. Carcharoth (talk) 23:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Dinosaur discussion edit
So this is wikipedia talk..?? I thought it would be live chat or something. Anyway, i just re-edited the Dinosaur Discussion page, but apparently you had edited it in the meantime... i couldn't check my messages during, so i re-put my section ("The Article") at the top. Sorry, i'm new to this. Please move it to the bottom if you haven't already, and i did make a few additions so use the new version. I'll try to check it again one of these days. Thanks & cheers. Boy, this is a slow way to "talk"... (Tortugadillo (talk) 07:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC))
Message to the man himself!
before you all out try to ban me for this message, it's not vandalism. I'm just asking you not to delete my page for some faroff reason like you did last time. I was making a user page and you deleted it for nonsense, and i have seen user pages with far less "value"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoolizfun! (talk • contribs) 16:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Congrats.
Congratulations on your successful RFA. :) If you need any help, feel free to ask. · AndonicO Hail! 21:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Lol... I was under the impression it was only a week or two ago, silly me. :P · AndonicO Hail! 21:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't aware that it didn't apply to schools. Thanks! CordeliaHenrietta (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi There,
I try to understand what I am doing wrong, I change all content based on the following example.
[[2]]
I use the same information and flow.
I just try to make this work. Have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skura (talk • contribs) 14:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for your quick respond, sorry for the trouble, I understand.
have a great day —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skura (talk • contribs) 22:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Cat RFC
Hi, yes, it's deliberate. The error was what I first posted, then I corrected it once I realised what I'd done wrong. I had previously reported the problem on WP:AIV and was advised by an admin to put it to and article RFC, and as a courtesy to inform the two editors involved that I had done so, which I did. One of those editors subsequently reposted the erroneous RFC causing the bot error. Mjroots (talk) 20:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- OK, it's not vandalism, but is it allowed for an editor to disrupt processes like RFC? Especially when it means their past editing may come under scrutiny? Mjroots (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I do not agree with your removing the speedy deletion tag from the article, Graduate entry. It clearly qualifies under CSDA3. It is nothing more than two sentences of text + see also + external links. This article should be merely a redirect to the first professional degree article which already covers this material, or can be improved to do so. This stub is not necessary and serves no purpose that would not be equally served by a redirect. If you do not agree that this article should be redirected or deleted, I would very much like to appeal your decision. As an adminstrator, please advise. — SpikeToronto (talk) 20:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
A3 requires that the article must consist only of external links, category tags and "see also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, chat-like comments, and/or images, which clearly is not met here as there was content other then the see also section and external links. Note that the overall amount of text in the article is irrelevant, as many legitimate articles are very short - see Wikipedia:Stub. If you think the page should be redirected then go ahead and redirect it - nothing's stopping you. The same goes for the other article. Hut 8.5 20:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response, Hut 8.5. I will add redirecting Graduate entry to first professional degree to my to-do list. Also, before I make the redirect, I will try to make sure that first professional degree accurately covers the material in this and the other article. Thanks again! — SpikeToronto (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I do not agree with your removing the speedy deletion tag from the article, Second entry degree. It clearly qualifies under CSDA3. It is nothing more than two sentences of text + see also + external links. This article should be merely a redirect to the first professional degree article which already covers this material, or can be improved to do so. This stub is not necessary and serves no purpose that would not be equally served by a redirect. If you do not agree that this article should be redirected or deleted, I would very much like to appeal your decision. As an adminstrator, please advise. — SpikeToronto (talk) 20:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
context
How does Cox-Zucker Machine establish context? Saying that it's the name of an algorithm isn't context. What it does, what it's for- there's no mention at all of anything other than mere existence. How is this not speediable? - superβεεcat 19:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
Just a quickie to say thanks for approving my rollback request. :) Kal [talk] 07:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Strathblane
i live in strathblane so i think im more qualified to right about it than you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.255.171 (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Stop removing content from the strathblane page, you are making it very difficult to make this page expanded and all the information you are deleting is valid so you are infact vandalising this page!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamus248 (talk • contribs)
Image upload and deletion stats (2007)
If you have time, would you be able to comment on Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria compliance#Weekly uploads and deletions and bot taggings? Discussion should be taking place at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content criteria compliance. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 01:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Cheers for the rollback access
Thanks for processing my Request for Rollback Access very quickly indeed. Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 11:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Ckydudelog didn't vandalize after the final warning; incorrect AIV report, watch out for them. Not saying you should unblock, just to be more careful about the times between warning and the last vandalism, especially on the indef'able ones. Glad to see you're using the tools well (well, because I'm not judging from this block alone). :) · AndonicO Hail! 18:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Damn, wish I had been there with huggle... :( · AndonicO Hail! 18:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Plese help to remove the Images from Muhammad
Plese help to remove the Images from Muhammad, or we will stop to contribute in Wikipedia. --Librarianpmolib (talk) 10:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps its an idea to salt this page to prevent it from re-creation? Several different users keep recreating it to an extend where its getting pretty annoying (4x within 4 hours). There is an AFD for it, but i don't know if this is enough to lock it from re-creation. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 15:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've salted it - I can see this is only going to get recreated again and again. Hut 8.5 15:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I have unsalted this page as someone has written a very well sourced article which now meets WP:V and WP:N (which couldn't be said when I closed the last AfD). I just wanted to let you know since you were the one who salted it. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Breshna Orya
The instructions say before proposing a DELREV, I should contact the admin who closed the discussion. So I wanted to draw to your attention that there were two votes to keep, and three against. Is this indeed sufficient consensus ? I personally think the argument I provided is quite strong, i.e. notability within/for a country is sufficient for notability in wikipedia. Or am I wrong ? --Afghanking (talk) 17:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I will try to rephrase my comment. What I mean is this. Essentially I am asking you a question whcih I think is important for wikipedia. Let's suppose:
- Actor X is the top 100th actor in the USA.
- Actor Y is the top 10th actor in Mongolia.
- Then, it is clear that on one side, X will be known worldwide because he comes from a prominent country like US, but Y will not be known worldwide at all. But on the other side, within the relevant country, Y is far better known (in Mongolia) than X in his country (in the US).
- What counts then for wikipedia ? Notability worldwide (then west-centric !), or within a country ? If it is only worldwide notability that counts, fine, then it means this is west-oriented project, and US actors stay in the English wikipedia (and others too though because the world is west-oriented), Mongialian actors go to the Mongolian wikipedia, and Breshna Orya can go to the Pashto wikipedia. Is it so ? --Afghanking (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, you state that the level of coverage needed is absolute and not relative, it does not vary depending on the subject. Hence, am I correct that a reserve player for a small US football team is more notable than the president of the republic of Nauru ? ;-) I am being deliberately sarcastic here. What is the right forum to discuss this ? --Afghanking (talk) 13:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Admin
Thanks for the message. I am new and i thought you had to apply with the website to be able to edit articles. Sorry about the confusion and thanks for the links about how Wikipedia works. You are a big help.--Okay311 (talk) 23:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Relaying message
[3]. 
—Animum (talk) 17:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Your deleted my page about the Cross Bred Mongrels
they are a famous Australian hiphop band, I was personally quite surprised that they didn't have a wikipedia article, for example, Bill Gates not having a wikipedia page. Its to the same effect really, so I wrote one, and I had just returned to increase it by ten fold, but I found that it was deleted! please undelete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OrangeDeoxys (talk • contribs) 10:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks heaps for your fast revert and indef block on that attack-only account which targetted my user page. It looks like the user (I'm presuming an immature person I know in real life who never has quite got over me editing Wikipedia) was impersonating someone else (my name isn't what they mentioned) just to get to me. Really great work, thanks again. SMC (talk) 11:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Proposal RE: User:Mikkalai's vow of silence
You are a previous participant in the discussion at WP:AN/I about User:Mikkalai's vow of silence. This is to inform you, that I have made a proposal for resolution for the issue. I am informing all of the users who participated, so this is not an attempt to WP:CANVAS support for any particular position.
The proposal can be found at: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed resolution (Mikkalai vow of silence) Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 01:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I suspected a speedy might have been turned down, so I was ready to nominate it for deletion nonetheless. The deletion nomination is now open. -- Roleplayer (talk) 14:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Qualifications-Based Selection
Hello. Wikipedia's Oxymoron83 guided me to your talk page. I am writing you about a deletion:
07:35, 3 December 2007 Hut 8.5 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Qualifications-Based Selection" (G12, copyright violation from http://oqbs.com/)
I am the original author of an article created for and posted only to Wikipedia.com entitled, "Qualifications-Based Selection." It was an original article and did not contain copyrighted material.
My article has been stolen by several websites, as a google search will reveal. One site stealing my original content is http://oqbs.com/. I was not aware of this website until Oxymoron83 told me about it.
Another example of a site lifting my content wholly is http://www.answers.com/topic/qualifications-based-selection?cat=biz-fin. This site includes a reference back to Wikipedia and even preserves my Wikipedia footnotes, which oqbs.com leaves off.
I am a former official with the State of Georgia, USA, state government. My office developed procurement processes and guidelines for professional construction services. You can see my name on state publications as editor or contributor (for example, http://scm.ga.gov/Manual/Appendix/Project%20Implementation/Guidelines_for_Commissioning.pdf).
The article that I personally authored and placed in Wikipedia during the summer of 2007 is replete with references about the state of Georgia, including to http://www.qbsgeorgia.org/, an organization in which I have been active.
I am really at a loss to know how to assert more clearly that I am the original author of the deleted article.
Certainly, I want my article restored to Wikipedia. I did not copyright my material because I do not mind it being in the public domain. The topic is innocuous and academic; certainly, it is not controversial.
Once this article is restored (or I happen to author some future article), what do I do to reduce the chances that someone will steal my legitimate content and then someone will presume that fault lies with me instead of the thief and have my hard work in Wikipedia summarily deleted?
I sincerely thank you for any help. I will be glad to provide whatever evidence you might require. Kimballp (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for Restoring QBS!
Many thanks for putting back my article on Qualifications-Based Selection. Thanks, also, for placing the notice about Copyright in the page's Discussion area.
I could not ask for better help. Much obliged.
Kimballp (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Needing help
There's a copyright violation matter at User talk:MisterBee1966#List of what needs to be done to fix this that needs an admin experienced in closing and deleting article history, which I ain't. If you would be willing to review the section, and possibly the preceding two sections, I think everyone would be very appreciative. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 17:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your sensible comment on the issue. --Avinesh Jose T 06:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
AIV report
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
And also, I am on the Huggle whitelist. I shouldn't be auto-reported to AIV if I'm on the white list, should I? Is there a way to stop myself from accidentally doing this? Steve Crossin (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- The issue with Huggle has been resolved. Yeah, I found it hilarious. Steve Crossin (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)