User talk:The-Pope/Archive 5

David Neal

Totally NN based on what I read, so I invoked WP:BOLD once more and deleted it. Thanks for alerting me! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jason Kohlmorgen

Hello The-Pope. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jason Kohlmorgen, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. NW (Talk) 01:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Need your help

Wikipedia_talk:Article_Incubator#I_suggested_this_on_the_BLP_RFC.2C_what_do_you_all_think.3F.

Creating the list is the easy part.

Do you know how to automate moving a list of articles from main space to project space?

Wikipedia:Article_Incubator#How_it_works but automated?

Example using bob silly Johnson (flutist) :

1. Moved to: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Unreferenced BLPs/Music/bob silly Johnson (flutist)
2. the {{Article Incubator|status=new}} is added to the top of bob silly Johnson (flutist).
3. all categories and templates on bob silly Johnson (flutist) are hidden using <!-- -->

I think we should wait to delete the main space pages, giving creators and contributors some time to see what happened. Ikip 01:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

As a member of wikiproject Australia

I am so thrilled at your progress!

Can you more explicitly bring up the collaboration between Wikiproject and WP:Incubator? I incubated around 150 articles today. See: Wikipedia:Article_Incubator/Unreferenced_BLPs/Australia#Incubated_articles

I see you dont have email, could you please email me? There are a million reasons why I would rather talk to you about this off wiki. Thank you for your hard work! Ikip 09:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to The-Pope for his incredible efforts and diligence in saving articles for project Australia. Your dedication to the project is unmatched only by your ingenuity. Ikip 09:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Award from: Article Rescue Squadron Hall of Fame

Congratulations, you have been inducted into the Article Rescue Squadron Hall of Fame, breaking all records by far ever made with 1811 articles saved.

See the new 1811 little Life Preserver at the top of your page?

Coding:

Feel free to add more articles saved awards to your page, and to award other people this award too, for saving articles from deletion on Wikipedia. Ikip 09:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Umm, thanks, but I didn't save 1811... I've saved about 20. Please stop moving articles out of mainspace into the incubator. I don't consider them saved by doing that.The-Pope (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you the pope, I was being facetious ;). As you know, I have stopped. My apologies. I appreciated working with you, Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs was brilliant. I can tell you are truly dedicated to the Wikiproject Australia. Ikip 17:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you help with notifying wikiprojects about the unrefeerenced BLP problem?

Your ideas on getting wikiprojects involved were great. Could you join us in the effort of notifying them? More here [1] Any help you can give would be appreciated. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 01:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Australian unref BLPs

Is there any chance you could run another search to update the list? I've seen a few prominent biographies being hit today, which as a result won't be on the list people are working from. Rebecca (talk) 11:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting rid of the rugby articles, but any chance you could update this? Rebecca (talk) 14:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Update what? My laptop's still recovering from crunching the numbers again from scratch! It was a "fresh" comparison of the two categories. The update the other day was a comparison of the list on the working page against the Unref BLPs cat, to save time. The only Aussie related Unrefed BLPs that won't be caught are any that haven't been tagged as WP Australia. I'm not updating the "subproject" sections, as I'll let each subproject handle it in whichever way they want (deletion/strikeout/extra comments etc). As we get closer to the end I might do some other checks, say on the Category:Australian people tree, but I think we'll get some strange Rugby league type cross-categorisation in there.The-Pope (talk) 14:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Move of John Kennedy, Jr. (footballer) to John Kennedy, Jr. (Australian rules footballer)

I appreciate your taking the time to communicate with me regarding this matter. I can allay your concern by assuring you that, as far as this move is concerned, I never had any further intention of changing hundreds or even a couple of qualifiers for footballers, singers, politicians or any other profession for the sake of consistency or for any other sake. Rather than presenting examples in my move/edit summary of other entries which use the parenthetical qualifier "(Australian rules footballer)", I should have noted that the move of John Kennedy, Jr. (footballer) to John Kennedy, Jr. (Australian rules footballer) merely served to elucidate the subject from John Kennedy (English footballer) and John Kennedy (Scottish footballer) who appear next to him on the John Kennedy (disambiguation) page. The other edits associated with this move merely served to adjust incoming links. While, as you point out, there is no other John Kennedy, Jr. who is a footballer, the reason to bother is that all four John Kennedys (the fourth being John Kennedy, Sr.) who were/are footballers, appear under subheader "Sports competitors" on the John Kennedy (disambiguation) page, thus highlighting the uneven nature of the three qualifiers. Since the son of the 35th president of the United States is entered as John F. Kennedy, Jr., and not merely as "John Kennedy, Jr.", John Kennedy, Jr. (Australian rules footballer) is, theoretically, able to stand alone and has no need of any qualifier, but, since most Wikipedia users were apparently judged unlikely to enter the middle initial "F.", while the John Kennedy, Jr. might-have-been-disambiguation page, exists solely as a redirect to the John Kennedy (disambiguation) page, the use of the qualifier was effectuated. An overlong explanation, but one which can serve as a referral point for future discussions.—Roman Spinner (talk) 10:56, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Cleaned up last of the incubated articles

I cleaned up the last of the articles I incubated a week ago, so they will now be on the list on the wonderful page you created. Thanks. Ikip 16:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Corey Jones

Well, I agree with you 100%. I've tried for the past 3 years to fix up articles, and get nary a pat on the back or a barnstar, much less any help. The barbarians at the gate have taken over Wikipedia. They cry: Carthago delenda est! - get rid of 60,000 articles all at once, delete on sight! When others do the same, that is, ProD unreferenced articles, they get away with it, quoting Chariman Jimbo. But all I've gotten is grief over the past few days when I've been as sloppya few times, as they have been for years. At least I've made some good test cases to show that I'm right. That's my only consolation around here. The proposed rules suck like dead bunnies. I was just testing them to prove that they won't work. I'm glad at least you and DGG have noticed. Thank you again! Bearian (talk) 18:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Aus UBLPs

I'd asked User:The wub for some help in adding categories and inter-wiki links to the WP India unsourced BLPs list and the cricket list, I also mentioned that WP Australia had a similar list, and he's created a table with all the unsourced BLPs with inter-wiki links and the categories. This would help prioritizing and also possibly get refs from other wikis. The discussion and links are at User_talk:The_wub#Lazarus_like_script_help. Cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Big one

I have tagged the editor and the article - will be inneresting to see what happens SatuSuro 14:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

heads up

This hoax and vandal only account created this: [2] Thought you might want to know, it looks like it was removed.

I fear he is wanting to be blocked and will be indefinitely blocked shortly. He is probably a high school kid, as most of our vandals statistically are. Okip (formerly Ikip) 17:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

UAA report

You're welcome! Really, for the reasons noted, I don't see this as a problem. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Your idea at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies of living people

Wow, too bad it was buried at 44.

You comments were so insightful, they inspired me to add more to Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people/Phase_II#Table_summary even though the table was closed already. I felt these ideas had to be included:

Make it known that this is the site's current main priority...get WolterBot to change the order of the cleanup list to highlight what are the real problem areas, and which ones are "nice-to-haves" (i.e. Wikipedia:Manual of Style [problems]).

Get ALL of the projects on board. Get a bot...to auto-generate the lists based on the intersection of Category:Unreferenced BLPs and Category:WikiProject XYZ articles. [The bot will need to be smart because] the project [categories] are on the talk pages, but the unreferenced BLPs are on the main pages. [I personally] can do it for a project at a time using Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser, so it [is possible]. Then create a Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs page for EVERY project. Update the list daily.

Hold a competition to see who can zero their list the quickest - winner gets money/fame/links on the main page for a month/etc.

Create a hall of fame for most removed each week.

How can this be done, where to start? :) Okip (formerly Ikip) 10:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you create a "how to" on how you used the Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser? Any information you can provide at this point would be helpful. I can expand anything you write, and let other projects know. Okip (the new and improved Ikip) 18:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and posted this: Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Unreferenced_biography of_living_persons bot_to_get_projects_involved_in referencing. Okip (the new and improved Ikip) 18:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Your excellent idea of holding a BLP contest

	The Unreferenced living persons contest
	Please help us build this contest. Your suggestions are warmly welcome. >> Sign up now. <<

Wikipedia_talk:WikiCup#BLP reference contest. Okip (formerly Ikip) 20:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

2009 Concordia College Basketball Knockout Champions

Yeah well, as I said, "When (not if)".
Given that nobody has done anything since you placed the prod, and given that there's no indication that anybody will do anything, between-you-and-me, I suggest a "move" of the page to User:Braydog/2009 Concordia College Basketball Knockout Champions. Are you OK with that? If so, I'll do it when you give me the OK. (Or you can do it.)
After all, as you said, it's a nice piece of reporting that should be useful somewhere that it will be appreciated - just not here on WP. And it would be a shame to just throw it away.
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The only issue I have with userfication is that we haven't seen Braydog back since then, and if you do userfy it, it must be done with a deadline of deletion after another week/fortnight/month - remember WP:NOTWEBHOST. and then there are all of the photos... not sure if any are really encyclopaedic The-Pope (talk) 13:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

(Expletive deleted. Mumble, grumble, moan whinge, whine.) Big sigh.

(Sadly), I have no reasonable counter-arguement. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

RE:"Agree, but very disappointed that the one thing that can happen now, #3 above, has still been left in the hands of a few users and projects. Wolterbot hasn't done a cleanup list since December (not his fault, relies on the database dump). NOT GOOD ENOUGH. WP:Aust had 1652 listed then. We have less than 600 today. There have probably been 10-20 editors working on this for the past month. It takes me 5-10 minutes to do an update, or 20-30 minutes to do a fresh generation of our working list. Time that could done by a bot, but the only botmaker who was interested in currently banned. Lists of unreferenced BLPs from June 2008 don't interest me. Lists of unreferenced Olympians, or Engineers, or Politicians might. We don't need an RFC to do this, just some proper emphasis to be applied from above. Or is it really not that important to those running the show?"

As a veteran editor, you know that your sole opinion in this proposal will be sidelined. Only the main proposal will be pushed forward, and we will have no changes to Wolterbot.

I am again deeply sorry that I jumped ahead, and misread your stated goals and intentions. I have been the strongest advocate of your proposals. I have spent literally days and days trying to enact your proposals and ideas (bot idea and WP:CONTEST idea). Your work in unreferenced BLPs for Australia has been phenomenal, and a true inspiration to me. That said please see: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people#Part_1_Disagree

As other editors have pointed out, there has been several intentional moves in this request for comment:

1. Arguing that change is inevitable. As anyone who has tried to change policy here knows, change is never inevitable.
2. In closing Phase I, only one position is advocated, marginalizing or ignoring all other positions.
3. Repeated attempts to silence editors, particularly me.
4. Attrition, having the argument drag out so long, and editors get so tired of the discussion, that editors will either:

1. drop out of the discussion, or
2. accept a proposal which if originally proposed, would get wide spread opposition.

The end result is that editors who support radical, disruptive change, control the conversation, and less involved editors think that they only have a narrow list of choices, and !vote to accept bitey proposals which will only further hurt wikipedia growth and bite newcomers. Compromise means that both sides give up something.

I would possibly support this proposal if it includes strong WP:BEFORE language, to help protect new editors contributions, as the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people#WP:BEFORE proposal, which has 19 supports, advocates.

I would strongly encourage you to reconsider your position. Okip 12:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

My position is that we should all forget about the political rubbish and start writing an encyclopaedia again. Of the "agreed part 1 proposal", #1 is fine - change the rules going forward, don't apply them retrospectively, it should have some form of non-bitey side to it though, #2 fine, change the expectation, don't shoot down what we've got. #3 I said enough about in my response, #4-9 absolutely. I don't see what the problem is. I just want something automated to split the 42,000 into chunks that are workable, not just by date they were noticed. No more drama.The-Pope (talk) 13:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no problem, I thought it would be a tough sale. :)

How do you think this proposal will effect new user contributions?

See also Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people#Consensus_is_forming:_an_alternative_view_and_table_summary_of_all_positions which completely supports the idea that these positions are a false consensus.

Thanks for listening. Okip 14:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

I just noticed your note on my talk page regarding my edit to Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs. It would seem I had inadvertantly edited a previous version of the page. Hack (talk) 03:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Doug Heywood

We need a death date on Doug Heywood Also, there is a great amount more that has been said on Doug Heywood - both as a great man and as a brilliant commentator ... the article is rather skimp on this wonderful man and the esteem in which he is held - certainly in Victoria —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.20.159 (talk) 14:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Louise Sauvage

I know I was lazy - will fully reference comments in the next couple of days. Dan arndt (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Will have to remember that next time. How odd!! Orderinchaos 18:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Druery

Hey - I've had a bit of a look around, but not much luck so far. A Google search turned up this, which suggests a connection but is pretty tenuous for our purposes. I'll keep an eye out for any more information on this - Druery's machinations trying to get into parliament were truly astonishing and it would be great to have a good place to put that information. Frickeg (talk) 05:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I really need your help and support

RE: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people#Tools

My fulfillment of your original ideas at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people/Phase_I#View_by_The-Pope:

"Get a bot/code/something quicker and smarter than me to auto-generate the lists based on the intersection of Category:Unreferenced BLPs and Category:WikiProject XYZ articles It needs some smarts, cause the project cats are on the talk pages, but the unreferenced BLPs are on the main pages, but I can do it for a project at a time using WP:AWB, so it must be able to be done. Then create a Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs page for EVERY project. Update the list daily...Do whatever, but get the projects on board...The Arbcom/Crats/Admins aren't going to do the grunt work to fix this problem, we are. Projects are."

Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_34#Unreferenced_biography_of_living_persons_bot_to_get_projects_involved_in_referencing.

User_talk:Tim1357#Taking_over_the_bot_request_where_Betacommand_left_off.3F

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects

"Hold a competition to see who can zero their list the quickest - winner gets money/fame/links on the main page for a month/etc. Create a hall of fame for most removed each week."

WP:CONTEST

We continue to strongly advocate the same things, but you stubbornly refuse to help me in any way. This is probably because of our misunderstanding earlier. I feel this is counterproductive and short sighted. I can't count the number of times I have had a strong disagreement with someone and I have later swallowed my disgust and distaste for them personally to accomplish a greater goal. I need your help in accomplishing your ideas.

The bottom line is that your great ideas in phase I were just that: ideas. I have actively ran with those ideas and have pushed for those ideas to become reality. I now need your help and strong support in making your ideas reality please. Okip 12:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Relax, despite your run-ins with other editors, I'm not into the drama, making alliances nor enemies. I'm not stubbornly refusing to help you - I've been concentrating on the one thing that will solve this mess - referencing (and some real life issues - there is life outside of wiki). From your list above, I looked at your contest, but I was actually suggesting a project by project contest, not a personal one - and as I've done most of the "easy" referencing that I can do, I'm unlikely to do well in any contest. I also have doubts over how you'll judge it without a lot of work by the judges, hence I'm not going to volunteer to be involved. I've made my point again a couple of times in the RFC(s) - thanks for trying to highlight it, but it did probably get missed by most people. As for the last two, I wasn't aware that Dashbot was involved in this way - I thought it was only notifying editors of uBLPs that they wrote once upon a time. I'll look into it some more tonight - thanks for helping out with it if it is what I wanted (haven't checked it out yet).

As I wrote in my reply to your query on my support for the Phase II support or whatever it was called, I'm really not too fussed by what happens in the future - especially to new articles, I actually probably support some tightening of the rules - as long as it's clear and does not include the mass CSD-like deletion of existing uBLPs, which is why I was the one that raised the issue of a few admins have already done some more deletions recently. Tonight I even contacted an ArbComm member for clarification of his statement on Maurreen's clarification request. Bottom line is everyone works differently. I prefer to highlight particular items, rather than your shotgun/alarmist approach. Both can work, each to our own. What exactly do you want me to do to support you?

My point is, despite this being a comunity based project, if this is so important, then someone in the top office should be doing what I, or Betacommand, or Dashbot does, and make it easy for each and every project to reference their uBLPs. If THEY don't do anything then they obviously are happy for the status quo or haphazard approach that you get by letting 10000 people do their own thing continue. Read my comments on the talkpageThe-Pope (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Your questions

Howdy, Your Holiness, and thanks for the questions you posed on my talk page. I will respond to them in the order in which you asked them:

1. I am saying that the onus is on editors supporting inclusion of material to source it, rather than on editors supporting its removal to demonstrate that it cannot be sourced.
2. I believe that recent discussions have demonstrated that any material about a living person about whom no sources have been provided to confirm even existence or basic claim to notability is contentious.
3. Unsourced BLPs should be improved and rectified, so no problems there. But to make attempts at improvement a prerequisite to deletion would effectively reverse the longstanding core policy onus to which I refer in my answer to your first question; it's a basic principle of legislative interpretation that provisions should be read harmoniously with one another, which is what I believe that I am doing here. As to page deletion being a last resort, I agree with this too. The BLP situation has grown so dire that we are very nearly at the last resort.

Please let me know if you have any further questions. Steve Smith (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Your suggestion that all editors share responsibility for sourcing all articles is problematic for three reasons:

1. It creates a situation in which there is no accountability; if everybody is collectively responsible for something, then nobody is responsible for it (which is one of Wikipedia's major problems). Since nobody is individually responsible, it never gets done (except, of course when done|the threat of deletion is invoked - the very motivator that you seem to be trying to remove).

2. It creates a situation in which people can create messes without being required to clean them up. Indeed, your philosophy would allow people who had created a mess to retort, when asked to clean it up, with "Why don't you do it? It's no more my responsibility than it is yours!"

3. It flatly contradicts WP:V, one of our core policies.

You have a nice day too, and thank you for your sourcing work (that's sincere, though context may make it appear snarky). Steve Smith (talk) 18:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback @ Peachey88's talkpage

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Peachey88's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Why? :S

why did u delete the Lelo Sejean article? It had references. He is an actual living person. I only made sure to use information im sure is correct. Please reply. thx :) smkaram (User talk:smkaram|talk]]) 21:16, 9 March 2010 (KSA)

ArbCom BLP statement

That was very well put. Maurreen (talk) 21:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Aussie Unreferenced BLPs

Just a quick note to say that I think that you are doing an amazing job with the list - I think a lot of editors have lost interest but it is good to see someone is still at it! Dan arndt (talk) 06:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

That's my problem too easily sidetracked... Will see about finishing off the musicians. Dan arndt (talk)

Tagging

Hi. Since you are tagging with AWB like in this one can you tag under the WPBiography of by using the Kingbot Plugin? This ensures that blp tags will be on the top per WP:TPL. Take care of newlines between templates too! Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 12:15, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, makes it a lot easier! Might have to investigate the other plugins to see what I've been missing! Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 12:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Two more tips:

• Use WikiProject Australia instead of WP Australia. Helps readability.
• Use AWB 5.0.1.0 It has general fixes specialised for talk pages.

Happy editing! -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

uBLPs

I had a look at each of the Aus music remainders during February, I could find very little independent coverage for them and have no problem with the deletion of those that were left at that time (current list is different and I haven't checked).shaidar cuebiyar (talk ) 21:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. You say "dedicated" I say monomaniac! I'm working on other AusMus related stuff this month and so won't be doing much for the current uBLPs list.shaidar cuebiyar (talk ) 02:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphan tag

Hello - not sure if you meant to remove the orphan tag in this edit? Only a one article links to Neilson Taione, so it should be restored. Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 14:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with "minor" problem tags being plastered on the top of articles - this sort of procedural tag - which does not affect the verifiability or accuracy of the article and hence does not need to "warn" readers - should be either at the bottom or on the talk page. Orphans to me have no parents, so I also disagree with the multiple links needed rule. I'm busy focusing on referencing BLP articles, not linking to them, so if you think it should have the tag, you can put it back, or find links yourself. The-Pope (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

You may disagree with the tags, but maintenance tags are not supposed to be removed without addressing the concern. I also add references to BLPs, and having someone tag the article allows me to find the articles more easily. In the same vein having the Orphan tag allows those so inclined to identify orphan articles. Regardless of your personal preference, the tag is accurate and helpful and as such I will add it back.Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 14:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Australian BLP listing pages

I've noticed that you tagged pages such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Tasmanis/Unreferenced BLPs for deletion under G6. Has this been discussed somewhere, or is there some other reason for their deletion? I'd appreciate it if you pointed me to such a discussion; if you reply here, please leave me a talkback. Nyttend (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Eric Bailey (basketball)

Excellent, that's the bold cleanup that Eric Bailey (basketball) really needed! John of Reading (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Eagles247's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:20, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Progress towards all wikiprojects using User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects?

anything new about all wikiprojects being signed up for User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects? Okip 02:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Barlow

On March 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michael Barlow, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 10:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

AFL players info boxes

As you know there are several info boxes on wiki, is there a general info box that will show all info rather than hide lines of text? I've tried several different info boxes and I have been disappointed with the resultant display.Purrum (talk) 23:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Red Links

I'm sorry, i just don't see the point in having a red link on a page when there is no page that it is linked too yet. What's the point in having one when a page doesn't exist? If you think they are "not that bad", why don't you just create the page in which the red links are linked to? [User:Stt13|Stt13]] (talk) 23:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah fair enough. Sorry about that. I'll learn from now on. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stt13 (talk • contribs) 05:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Bidgee's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bidgee (talk) 14:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Orderinchaos's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orderinchaos 14:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

In answer (after checking with Mkativerata) I think he is notable as a lawyer and writer, some decruftification of the page may be necessary to emphasise that role rather than his presently non-notable political role of a preselection candidate. Orderinchaos 21:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. His candidacy can certainly be mentioned, but not as the main point of his notability. Frickeg (talk) 00:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Alex Silvagni

On April 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alex Silvagni, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Ucucha 00:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Conduct

I take offense to the rude manner in which you have phrased your response to me. Treat your co-workers with respect or don't expect respect in return. Aspirex (talk) 02:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

After I've spent the last 3 months fixing up the Unreferenced BLP mess, to see an experienced editor create a bunch of unreferenced BLPs is mindboggling. Surely you must have known that wikipedia now demands a higher standard referencing in articles? Look at your talk page - it's full of notices about the same issues - notability or referencing. I don't want to be spending my time trying to save new articles - I'm busy enough with the old ones - when it could have all been avoided by you spending 2 extra minutes when you created the articles, finding sources. I am getting sick of cleaning up other people's messes. I can excuse articles written years ago when the rules weren't as strict, but surely you must have noticed the recent crackdown????The-Pope (talk) 02:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

That is not the issue. The issue was the manner in which you addressed me. I have, in fact, been rather inactive over the past few months, and had not noticed the crackdown, but the deletion proposals alone would have been enough to incite my action. Your foul comment on my talk page did not; and the fact that nowhere have you issued an apology to me suggests that you believe your conduct was appropriate, which you need to understand is not the case. I'm educated, I'm mature, and I can take constructive criticism, which Alexandr Dmitri provided and you did not.Aspirex (talk) 07:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

1. I admit I did go overboard, but I've done so much work, probably too much - to the point of being close to burnt out on this issue - over the past 3 months on uBLPs that I did get angry when I saw the articles - the "embarrassing effort" comment I only put as an afterthought as I happened to be reading up on the previous night's games at the time, and I probably thought I was being clever with the Carlton link. That was uncalled for and I apologise for including that.
2. A day or so earlier, a bunch of delisted AFL players were nominated for deletion. And they will be deleted. There is nothing we can do to save them, other than find a bunch of reliable sources on each of them, which I don't think exist. In that AfD, someone has since questioned if still-listed players who are yet to debut as being deletion targets too. You've probably found enough sources to be safe from any attacks on those pages, but you should also read Wikipedia_talk:Notability (people)#RFC: WP:Athlete Professional Clause Needs Improvement to see what the mood is about the WP:ATHLETE requirement at the moment. Things are achanging.
3. When I've been so immersed in the issues for so long, it's easy to forget that a lot of people aren't reading the all of the non-article space wikidrama sections. Sometimes I wish I've stayed out of it too, but I should have WP:AGF that you weren't just being lazy, recalcitrant or malicious, so I apologise for not doing that.The-Pope (talk) 14:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I accept your apology, and will pay closer attention to referencnig in the future.Aspirex (talk) 07:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Well done

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For all your work on referencing Australian BLPs YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

You can tell what sort of working man he is - he cannot even get a barnstar to work :) SatuSuro 02:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Cricket quiz

Thabks for the correction. That was careless of me. JH (talk page) 18:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Weekend Special

An article that you have been involved in editing, Weekend Special, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weekend Special. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. B.Wind (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Bah after all this time

You allude to some knowledge of the language mate - you continue to astound me :)

And also that would explain the problem with - There are currently 1 |WP:DEATH articles

on my user page - carn the dockers! SatuSuro 00:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Kings

Heh, tell me about it. When the Patriots signed him yesterday, their PR department released an incorrect statement saying it was the 38-year old coach. They had to issue a correction today. Pats1 ^T/C 03:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Undelete please

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 14:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

since A Practical Reference to Religious Diversity for Operational Police and Emergency Services was redone....

I was wondering if someone could notify the users who posted, especially early on in the deletion process, that the article was greatly re-written and if they could take a second look. I know some have continued to note it for deletion but most haven't spoken again since the re-write and I've tried to frame which aspect of the notability of a book it may fall under near the bottom of the deletion discussion. I also understand from reading Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#You_may_edit_the_article_during_the_discussion that there may be some room for moving viable content into the Australasian Police Multicultural Advisory Bureau article if it's deleted, or indeed there is even the possibility of an appeal though of course that's probably rarely done, and even more rarely successful. I'd welcome your thoughts. Smkolins (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

If it is clearly stated in the AFD that the article has been improved, and there is a swing towards keep by the later reviewers, the editor who closes the AfD should take the state of the article as it stands now into account. AfDs are not a vote, it isn't done on pure numbers. It's done as per the policies and guidelines. Having a quick look at the article for the first time since I nominated it, it does look much better, but it really isn't my area of expertise nor interest, so I don't think I'll evaluate it any further. My nomination was more procedural than any real desire to delete.

If you think it still might be deleted, then I'd save a copy for yourself as a backup (just copy the text from the edit window into a text file). Just don't recreate it unless you address the main issues that the closing admin states. I've never really had anything to do with DRV, so I'm not sure about undeleting. There is, however, nothing stopping you duplicating some of the information into the article now. Many articles are partially duplicated in different articles. As for notifying users who have already commented, you might want to read WP:CANVASS first to see if it is allowed. I'm not sure of the guidelines in this area. You could look at WP:DELSORT to see if there are any other lists that could be notified to get a wider audience. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 15:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Rollback.

Useful! Thank you. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Curious on Unreferenced BLPs

Is there a way to merged some BLPs under one article if they fall under the same topic and are only notable in that certain topic? Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't be sure without knowing which BLPs you are talking about, but in the past we've redirected footballers who were drafted, but never played, to a list of players, rather than have their own page. See Ashley Clancy and the AfD that endorsed the idea, for an example. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, it is actors in the Mortal Kombat franchise John Parrish (actor), Eddie Wong,. John Turk, Kerri Hoskins, Becky Gable, Elizabeth Malecki, Katalin Zamiar, Anthony Marquez, Daniel Pesina, Carlos Pesina, Ho Sung Pak, Richard Divizio, Sal Divita. Only about 2 of them are unreferenced but all of them lack notability. Recently also, Bryan Glynn (actor) and Lia Montelongo were deleted but I think they could all go in one page. I just want a second opinion. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Unref BLP Project Figure Skating - a little more time?

Regarding your note here [3] about unreferenced BLPs, right now Project Figure Skating appears to be critically understaffed. I think most of these unreferenced skater BLPs were ultimately based on reliable sources, and many of them are not even necessarily BLPs. They seem to represent a fair amount of work by somebody, most of it probably salvageable. I'd prefer to whittle away at these at leisure, but June 1st is a pretty close deadline for covering all 113 of them.

In about an hour, I was able to determine that one bio (Yvonne Schulz) probably belongs in German Wikipedia but not English Wikipedia, that another was not for a living person (Walter Muehlbronner - I gave it some cites anyway) and that a third (Walter Bainbridge) was probably for someone still living but also easy to find cites for. However, I might not be able to put more than an hour a day into this, and I might not be able to rouse other Project Skating editors from whatever is preoccupying them.

What should I do? Maybe run down the list [4] and figure out who's at least no longer alive? That might still leave more work than I can finish by June 1st.

I realize that asking for a deadline extension is very unreasonable, especially considering that (compared to rugby, anyway) skating is hardly even a sport. ;-) I throw myself upon your mercy. Yakushima (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

No need to worry, there is no hard deadline, the June 1 deadline was to get to 30,000 in total, which is about 5,000, or about a 15% reduction, from where we are now. If you could do your bit, even 10-20 in that time, it would all help. We have identified about 500 WikiProjects (inc subprojects/taskforces) that have unreferenced BLPs - if they all only do 10 each, that is the 5000 done. If they do 10 per week, then that is almost 20,000 in a month! In total, taking in the increase from people still adding to the number by tagging articles, there is a 100-300 drop each day. If we leave it all to the 20-50 people invovled in the BLP issue, then we need to do 100 each. Spreading the load makes it all workable.

Some projects, like the Football/soccer one, Metal music and the big country based ones (Australia, Canada, Japan etc) have been doing this fairly well since the beginning of the year - but we've also already done the "easy" ones and are left with the more obscure articles, so it is slower going now.

We know that we are all volunteers, and editing time is limited, so no one can really complain if everyone just does whatever they can do, whenever they can do it. We're not going to be too critical of projects that don't do as well as others. We are also aware that some articles were mis-tagged - either like you said they aren't living, or already have some references. The key is breaking it down by WikiProjects gives people workable lists of articles that they know something about, know where reliable sources can be found and can clean them up a lot better than lists of "articles tagged in June 2008".

So thank you for your efforts and understand that if everyone does something, even small, then the project aims will be achieved.The-Pope (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

"BLPrefimprove" tag in John Gallagher (barrister) article

Your Goaliness,
I think the {{BLPrefimprove}} tag should be retained. There are only 6, and 4 of them are from the ABC itself; the other 2 are a Google Books cite and a primary source. I added them to save the article from deletion, and would argue that the article, as a WP:BLP, should still be better referenced. Your thoughts?
--Shirt58 (talk) 10:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Louis J Cabri

Then make yourself USEFULL and change the class instead of putting stupid tags on usefull biographies. Other reviewers have been usefull and agreed the biography is Wiki worthy, so I don't know WHO you are and which credentials you have to say otherwise. Rempval deniedKunsthistoriker (talk) 10:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Pope, I am NOT a newcommer, re my articles about e.g HENRY RAEBURN DOBSON in English and GHISLAINE DE MENTEN DE HORNE in Dutch and my article about this family and their War Record in Dutch. These articles are duely sourced, as is the one about the mineralogist. So I know how to source an article. But, there are always "know-betters" who - instead of contributing with constructive criticism - have the tendency to just destroy some work instead of bettering it. Your tags and comments were insulting and misplaced, especially when other reviewers like discospinster aknowledged it as Wikiworthy. How come you assume your own thoughts as being irrevocably right, without giving a valid argumentation ? Just a Tag ? Of course I am always updating it and bettering it. And would appreciate your constrcutive criticism. But what I CAN'T stand is un-cooperative know-alls. I hope you will give more constructive comments in the future. I read your talk page and many people are complaining about the way you intervene. Sorry about my comment, but I don't think this is the only comment about how you communicate with people. Kunsthistoriker (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Pope, Let's close this argument. I have said what I wanted to say. It's the way you communicate. I have no problem with the fact that you delete or replace or better the article and I take all criticism into account. Didn't you mention the article it's of no importance ? Well, so isn't the article about Douglas Morpeth. At least Cabri discovered two new minerals. Morpeth didn't discover anything. He was a simple accountant and got a knighthood for playing around with figures and numbers for 40 years. Very important, indeed. So, I start to be a bit fed-up with people putting tags and unconstructive comments on the talk page, while I am constantly working on the biography ãnd asking other Wikipedians what they think about it. HAVE SOME PATIENCE ! Thanks Kunsthistoriker (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Pope, NO you DIDN'T do anything wrong....noboy does anythng wrong here...they are only IMPATIENT. If you think it normally takes me two or 3 years to write a scientific article about an artist, producing a small bio about a guy on the other side of the world is RECORD speed for me. But, I took your comments into account and today I verified all his awards and achievements and cleaned up the header like discospinster asked me to do and took all the non-referenceable items away. I don't want it to become a promotional page for the man, where he is glorified. That is what I have against the bio of Douglas Morpeth. It's NOT seriously researched nor referenced. But, if other wikipedians think its ok, so be it...who am I anyway... :-) Case closed...keep well Kunsthistoriker (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I got a laugh : Louis J Cabri is ALREADY mentionned by somebody else in THE Wikipedia under CABRIITE, a mineral named after this scientist. For the rest he is NOT important...They only name minerals after him....I won't think WE will get this honour ! Kunsthistoriker (talk) 09:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

So, as I understood you well, I just leave the tags on the discussion page as they are...OK. Keep wellKunsthistoriker (talk) 09:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

So are you admitting that this "un-cooperative know-all" did nothing wrong except put the standard biography tag, the same tag that is on every bio in the wiki? Maybe apologies are a cultural thing. The-Pope (talk) 11:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Idea Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For your idea of effort of putting together this helpful list. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I was just about to send you the same barnstar. Thanks so much for the lists, until you started this I was just using the random unreferenced article function which was hit-or-miss in finding something that I was interested it. So, thanks from Wikiproject Musicians! J04n(talk page) 15:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I've said from the very beginning of the UBLP issue in Jan, that the problem was that people don't want to reference a random article, or an article from July 2008 - or if they do, they'll only do a few. They generally want to reference an article in an area that is of interest to them, and also one where they know the location and reliable of the sources. There is/was the Wolterbot cleanup list, but UBLPs are just one of hundreds of cleanup cats, and that list only gets published every few months. At the moment I'm trying to reference an article or two from lists that haven't been updated for a few weeks... and I don't have a clue which US Major League Soccer references are reliable, or Ugandan political references.. but I'll do a few for fun! Thanks for the thanks, and well done again on WP:Music's efforts. The-Pope (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the constructive information you provided to my talk page. It was well appreciated and also useful. On a similar subject, a template I have made is up for deletion. I would be curious as to your opinion in this regard. The template is named {{Source Style}}. Again thanks.My76Strat (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living People for Physics and Mathematics

I noticed that you left a message at the Physics project alerting us to the list of UBLP for the Physics project. But I do not see any corresponding information for the Mathematics project. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Why? JRSpriggs (talk) 19:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Every project has to be added individually. I've added what I think the WP:Mathematics Project uses as it's defining template, {{Maths rating}} to the Bot's list, that will output to Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Unreferenced BLPs as the next run at about 0500 UTC tomorrow, but in the mean time I think I've only found 5 articles using a recursive scan under Category:WikiProject Mathematics articles, a slightly different method from what the bot does. I'll post something to your project talk page.The-Pope (talk) 11:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. JRSpriggs (talk) 04:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates

Hi, I've been using the link at User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates to get to Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Unreferenced BLPs for weeks now and for some reason it was gone today. I put it back but I'm not positive if I did it correctly so that it will be updated daily. Can you please double check for me? Thanks, J04n(talk page) 10:52, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

As the WP Music doesn't have it's own template, but instead is a parameter in the {{WPBiography}} template, it is listed on User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects - the page that uses categories to make the lists, not User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates which uses templates. You will, however, find a lot of the specialist music projects, Wikipedia:WikiProject Hip hop, Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music, Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal etc, are now listed on the templates page. I just moved the Metal one from the category page, to the template page - that might have confused you! I have the /Unreferenced BLPs pages of the projects I follow on my watchlist, so each day at 5:00-5:30 UTC I get the updates showing up there. Doing a User Contributions in Wikipedia namespace for User:DASHBot is also very useful.. like this. The-Pope (talk) 11:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and your assumption is correct because I always start at the metal page then go to musicians. You're doing a great job with this, it is well appreciated! J04n(talk page) 11:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to be the enabler and compiler... we need more people like you are actually getting the UBLPs removed from the lists! Looks like we'll meet the 30,000 target... I just hope that there isn't too much "referencing fatigue" afterwards. I know with WP:Australia we raced down to about 300 from 1600 in a couple of months, then had a bunch of soap opera actors added to take us back up to 600, and we're only now getting back under 400 in the past 2 months. Very slow going. I've compiled a list of about 900 people in the Category:Musicians tree, but who don't have the musician-work-group=yes flag set, so I've been going through that over the past few days - so that's why some of your numbers are going up. We need some Classical music and Hip hop fans to be as good as the Metal and opera ones! Keep up the great work, cheers, The-Pope (talk) 12:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced biographies - WikiProject Pornography

An editor has been replacing the standard "This is an unreferenced article" template with {{BLP IMDB refimprove}}. Can we get this new template added to the list of templates that trigger an unreferenced BLP warning for WikiProject Pornography? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 08:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

There has been general consensus that whilst IMDB isn't a great reference, it is a reference, so they are being moved from the unreferenced category to the ref improve category. There is no immediate plans to use the DASHBot system to develop lists for other clean up categories. Your best bet would be to either hope that Wolterbot's Wikipedia:WikiProject_Pornography/Cleanup_listing gets updated soon or to generate them yourself using either the Category intersection tool or the list comparer function in WP:AWB.The-Pope (talk) 11:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Hrm... Okay, I'll look into the other avenues that you suggested. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 08:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Dead UBLPs

Hi, I noticed you using AWB, which is a bit hi tech for me. Would it enable you to get a list of UBLPs with the word died or dead in them? I reckon that more than 1% of the uBLPS I'm going through include an assertion that the subject is dead, so a trawl through the <30,000 might easily find hundreds where BLP no longer applies. I'd be happy to go through a list if you could create it. ϢereSpielChequers 17:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I've already checked a few weeks ago for anyone with a Category:XXXX deaths on their page, and there were only a few. Not sure how well AWB does text searches - haven't used it for that yet... I'll give it a go soon. The-Pope (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I suspect the editors who understand categories are usually the ones who would be comfortable removing BLP from {{unreferencedBLP}} - if you could do a text based search I'm pretty confident of that 1% figure as I'm sure I don't go 100 uBLPs between finding such cases. Sometimes its the last sentence with people writing articles chronologically, starting with the birth and ending with the death, and the article then being mistagged. ϢereSpielChequers 22:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Canadian music

Just wanted to post a thank you for tagging Canadian music articles with the Canada banner. The Canadian music project no longer has any unassessed quality articles. Leaving off all the parameters (other than music=yes) is the best way for now that we'll see the article and act upon it. Thanks again, Argolin (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Tim1357's talk page.
Message added 02:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I replied Tim1357 ^talk 02:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I made more responses. Tim1357 ^talk 16:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Xeno's talk page.
Message added 02:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Will Johnson article

Hi! Wasn't much to go on; it was unreferenced, lacked content/context and "puffy." Here's the text with my italics:

Will Johnson is a professional footballer for the St.Kilda Saints football club. Johnson was recruited from the Sandringham Zebras in the VFL. He also played for Collegians football club in the Victorian Amateurs. Johnson is a versatile key position player who is seen to be ready to go through the rigors of AFL football.

* Johnson is also a talented golfer and represented Victoria at junior level * Johnson was educated at Wesley College, Melbourne

I can put it back up if you wish, but again, there's not much to go on here. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

• Looks like our guy really is the real deal. Just did a bit of research and he's worth an article. I'll repost it and clean it up. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

BLPs without projects

Hi, I'm chipping away at User:The-Pope/UBLP_WP_not_listed, and found some already with project tags, Much of this is because the list hasn't been updated zince Xeno's bot did a trawl and tagged a load of Serbs, but have WikiProjects Western Asia and Architecture opted out of this? ϢereSpielChequers 12:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been meaning to update the list, but if you find a bunch which aren't in a project, then maybe get Xenobot to do a run, or let me know and I'll see what I can do. Boxing and college ball are planned, with fencing and badminton in the pipeline. I'm working through the musician-work-group only one myself manually. Might do a politicians-work-group vs regional projects check soon too. No idea about West Asia & Architecture... should they be added to the dashbot list?The-Pope (talk) 13:07, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I've also come across Typography, and WP Food - which is where I and at least one other have been tagging chefs and food writers so it could be quite big. These are ones that are already project tagged, whats the process for getting the project to adopt them, presumably you start by adding them to Dashbot to create a report? ϢereSpielChequers 23:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd add them to the Dashbot list, but wouln't bother notifying them now, unless it found a significant number of UBLPs. I'll probably do a bulk project notification/update again in mid-late June.The-Pope (talk) 01:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Inniverse

I see that a couple of your prods have been removed by User:Inniverse. This user seems to be systematically removing prod tags from articles, and I think these removals would benefit from some scrutiny. I've brought this up over at WP:N/N, but the thread didn't seem to generate much interest. I thought I should let you know, though; at any rate, the deprodder is supposed to notify you as a courtesy. Best, Sławomir Biały (talk) 16:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I was also annoyed at first, but he/she did come back and supplied a reference... not a great one, but at least there is one. I've tagged them as BLP sources, I'll give them a month or so, and then maybe take them to AfD if there is no improvement.The-Pope (talk) 12:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot scanning for Article Categories

The bot now accepts the |usearticlecats=yes parameter on User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. See an example of that working here.

Cheers, Tim1357 ^talk 01:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

ANI discussion regarding (Madden) accounts

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User with multiple accounts. Thank you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

This, this and this may be of interest to you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for labelling you as the sockpuppetteer there - the user's ANI thread was very misleading! Black Kite (t) (c) 19:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

RE: Usearticlecats slow edits

Hey Pope, Sorry I've been away for a bit. I'm just now going through the messages left on my talk page. Yes, I have noticed that those "usearticlecat" reports are going quite slow. I'll play around with it for a few minutes to see if I can speed up the query. As for you second question: Yes, the bot already uses case-insensitivity when a "*" is given in the category name. Otherwise, it is case sensitive. Finally, I can't say I know of any easy way to use an SQL query to recursively scan articles. I may ask around to see how others do it (Such as "CatScan") but for now, I'm afraid I can't do better. Tim1357 ^talk 21:06, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey mate why Nic Suban

I was just wondering why you said about the Rebels and Nic Suban on Canterbury21s talk page. Please reply to me regarding that matter! Cheers, and mate, I'm only a 11 year old boy; but loves Essendon and AFL! Canterbury21 (talk) 06:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Email

Would you be willing to enable email? I have a question for you I'd rather not post on wiki. Thanks. Brandon (talk) 05:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Never mind! Figured it out. Brandon (talk) 06:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

I noticed you've added project tags to the talk pages of many uBLPs and wanted to thank you. I can see that there were at least 25 (probably more) football project uBLPs that were tagged long ago but because they didn't have project tags never showed up in DashBOT's unreferenced list that we've been using and now that you've tagged them we know about them. Keep up the great work! Jogurney (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

There are still a few more to come too.. some refs, managers and a few mysterious smaller nation players! I'm more than happy to add articles to WP:FOOTY, as I see that your project is doing a fantastic job in actually referencing them... whilst other project have spurts of dropping the numbers, Footy has been consistently chipping away at a pretty daunting number of UBLPs. Well done for doing the real work... I'm just being an enabler at the moment, not so much a doer when it comes to UBLPs! The-Pope (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, further to the project tagging, epbr has been doing an awful lot of it of late so I wonder if you could rerun the list of uBLPs without projects other than biography? My betting is that it will have dropped sharply and we should be left with combination of the unusual and the undercategorised. If so and if you were willing to run this in the next ten days, I'm hoping to make some time available in August to do a chunk of them. ϢereSpielChequers 20:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

It had dropped remarkably - under 500 now, but the problem I'm having is that User:MSGJ has been standardising the template names to WikiProject XYZ, which at times stuffs up the lists for day or two, ie see here and here. I'll update it soon.The-Pope (talk) 00:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Great, I'm sure 500 would be doable and probably quite interesting. When we've done that would it be possible to get listings of some of the more beleagured projects? So people in wikiproject biography/S&A but no other wikiprojects? ϢereSpielChequers 16:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The BLP Barnstar
		For your work in bringing tens of thousands of uBLPs to the attention of their projects ϢereSpielChequers 16:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

PS if you ever fancy a run at RFA, do drop me a line. ϢereSpielChequers 16:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Sam Newman

Hi, mate. I've started a discussion here. - Richard Cavell (talk) 13:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Maths rating

The mathematics wikiproject is a little different than other projects. We already have a list of mathematics articles and list of mathematicians that are created by a bot with no need for talk page tagging. Therefore, we only use the {{maths rating}} for article assessment information. When you add this template to a talk page, please fill in the three assessment parameters: quality, priority, field. However, there is no need to add the maths rating template merely to mark an article as related to mathematics, because we use the usual article categorization system for that purpose. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I did the tagging so that the User:DASHBot unreferenced BLP list generation would work. It either uses a category or a talk page project template to determine which UBLPs belong to which project. It can't use lists or recursive cats. So to help solve the UBLP problem, you need to fit in and not just say "we're different". Also, as I don't know your project's standards or fields, I won't be filling in anything either. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 02:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Cricketwatch

See Template:CricketRecentChanges. –Moondyne 02:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Glenn Druery

Don't know if you remember our discussion about whether the cyclist and the politician were the same guy - turns out they are, although looking at his page I don't know if he's actually notable at all for his cycling career ... Frickeg (talk) 04:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Australia/ Oceania

Encyclopedia Brittainica says so! Greggydude (talk) 17:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Seems like most other people disagree, so I'm reverting your drastic changes.The-Pope (talk) 22:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Xymmax's talk page.
Message added 16:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Templates

No, they were already there, say if I write {{Fremantle Football Club}} it will use {{Fremantle Dockers}}. It is the same with the Power and other teams. GuineaPigWarrior (Talk) 7:45, 10 August, 2010 (UTC)

No, they are two separate templates. You created the FC one in April 2010, the Dockers one has been there since July 2007. Don't worry, I'll delete one and move/redirect them together. Only Freo, Port and the Saints seem to have duplicate navboxes. The-Pope (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

A heads-up

Hi, Your Goaliness,
The Screenwise crew are up to it again.
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
ps: best of luck to the Purple Haze in September. My poor old Roy-Boys are in an, ahem, "rebuilding phase".

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Victorian Football League . While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Adding the same blatant false information after being presented with the truth is vandalism so I will revert all day. That IP has no useful purpose on wikipedia. The-Pope (talk) 13:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

No probs. I've semi-protected which may slow the vandalism down a smidge. Sing out if I can help again. –Moondyne 14:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Gday

Yeah unfortunately have little time around like used to have :| - thanks for stepping in at the one liner indonesian soccer player items - they sort of are a constant sore - but hey - once youre pulled in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AlexNewArtBot/IndonesiaSearchResult can be a bit of an eye opener on some of the marvels of modern science SatuSuro 12:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Are you going to carry out your threat?

The article must be reliably sourced within 24 hours of the closure of this AfD or it will be deleted.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis McGiffen

I think you should. I think it's been just a little bit over 24 hours... and you still have the most recent edit to the article. The-Pope (talk) 12:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the reminder. SilkTork *^YES! 13:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Science!

Hi, I think the Science and academics group needs a hand with Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia/Unreferenced BLPs. Would you be able to produce a report showing which of them don't fit into any other project? If so I would go through it and add national or scientific projects to a lot of them. Cheers. ϢereSpielChequers 14:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

It's the 4th thing on my list! The sports-work-group into individual sports projects and politician-work-group into countries/regions/states etc are basically done, as is the every UBLP onto some list. I've thought about doing the science one, but haven't really started anything yet. I'll probably do the project notifications this weekend. On the incorrectly tagged front, recently I've noticed a bunch of NFL UBLPs with a ref in the infobox - might be an easy way to knock off a couple of hundred. The-Pope (talk) 14:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, If you can do a report on uBLPs only in WP:WikiProject France/Unreferenced BLPs I'll go through it and do some project tagging - there are currently 588 French uBLPS and only one person busy there. ϢereSpielChequers 09:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

McGailliard

Your holiness -- the comments you sent to McGailliard on his user page are quite right. But as he has identified himself has the creator of his BIP, by means of his userpage, then the COI is blatant. When he blanks his sandbox, then the COI will be taken care of, but the unreferenced autobiographical material (not the technology stuff) on the main article will continue as a problem. What is particularly disturbing is the claim that he served as a Ranger. Thanks so very much.--S. Rich 13:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Your comments on BLP are fair enough. I considered the possibility, but opted for COI. (Indeed, where would such info come from?) Still, I could not let the BLP/COI stuff sit there -- especially after seeing the "combat fields" of Korea and Ranger stuff. A real Ranger could not and would not say he "attain[ed] the position of United States Army Ranger." Ranger training is not a position to attain -- it is a qualification. (Here is a recent news story out about a Sergeant Major who boasted about his Ranger training, only he had not attended the course, much less completed it. [5].) As you can see, the military personnel view these claims quite seriously. As our BLP is a civilian, his claims (if he made them) cannot be prosecuted. Still, we do not have to let contentious BLP stuff sit in the article. Again, dear Pope, I thank you!--S. Rich 17:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Frank Ciulla

An article that you have been involved in editing, Frank Ciulla, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Ciulla. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Dan McGalliard

Hello The-Pope, Thank you for leaving a message on my talk-page about me needing to remove the 'Dan McGalliard' article from my home page. I've done that. I'm kind'a new at this & genuinely appreciate the help. The 'Dan McGalliard' article is my first. I am not, in any way, related to him. He is an acquaintance, albeit a much respected one. I do not consider the article to be finished by a long shot and it may never be - dependng on whether Dan McGalliard decides to help me with the facts. When I showed him the article on-lne, the first thing he said was, "I was not in combat in Korea. You've got to change that". This is the first chance I've had to do that and I found that someone else had already removed all reference to McGalliard's military service. And, that's fine - it needed to be done. Also, I saw there was some discussion about whether McGalliard was a U.S. Army Ranger. All I can say at this point is, I've heard him talk, in private, about exchanging fire with N.Korean snipers in the DMZ and I've heard him speak about things he had to do to 'earn' or 'attain' his Ranger patch. If I did not have 100% confidence in the truth of all that I never would have put it in the article. I do understand that my confidence in the truth of somethng is not the same as actual reference to the fact. When I presented the article, I knew it was... how shall I say, fluffy. An article about this man should be honed as sharp as tempered steel. Unfortunately, I had to run with what I knew or could find out. Now that McGalliard himself knows about the article, there remains some doubt if he'll help me by contributing facts & verification for me to work with. One thing he did say was that I'd left out his most noteworthy inventions. He proceeded to tell me about them, but since I'm no electrical engineer my eyes immediately glassed over with incomprehension. Dan McGalliard is an extremely interesting person whose made significant contributions to society. Whether I'll ever be able to bring the article up to the level of professionalism it deserves remains to be seen. Thank you again for your interest & help. Bakwtr (talk) 05:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Number 1 picks

hey thanks for the updates on Hooper and McDonald. I wasn't able to find out where they'd been recruited from. and yeah you've a point with GC and GWS potentially trading their picks away. - thomcbh No probs The-Pope (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Retirement

As of 18 August, 2010, I will leave forever. It seems I am being bullied on here. After all the work I have done with no credit at all. I will not put up with this no longer. No help from admins, just wanting to block me, why don't you "help" me instead of "picking" on me? I made my mide up basically after I was blocked last time, I almost left but didn't and came back for week and now I am being treated like a person who came out of jail. I'm only aloud to make an edit to page a day, if I am being treated that way it is pointless to return. After 1 year, 5 months, 27 days, "goodbye". Please leave a goodbye message on discussions page if you please. GuineaPigWarrior Forever!

WP:NODRAMAThe-Pope (talk) 00:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

cabinet ministers

Cabinet ministers always have references. If it's within the last 5 or 10 years, just G News is enough to find them. You seem to be nominating them for BLP prod, and I don't think this is as helpful as doing the very easy job of sourcing them. DGG ( talk ) 02:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Personally I think that we simply should not allow new unreferenced articles to be submitted and hence am using the BLPPROD system to stop them. For most foreign countries I have no idea what sources are reliable, and don't want to learn, so I'll leave it to others, hopefully the original author in most cases.

It's a pity, in a way, that the "iceberg" discovery or conversion of old articles has been so prevalent, as it makes it nearly impossible to tell how many new UBLPs are being made each month. I always thought that by now the message would be out there/systems be in place to stop new UBLPs, and let us concentrate on the backlog, but it doesn't seem to be the case. The-Pope (talk) 03:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the Speedy Deletion request posted on the Aleamotu'a article. I recently joined this and fairly new. English is a seond language so I will be struggling with writing all articles. Now I like some help on these issues.

Aleamotu'a Article: I am not the original author of this article, however when I saw that it was not researched properly, I rewrote the article and reference it to independent reliable sources. There is a dispute between myself and the original author and that is covered in the Aleamotu'a TAlk page. I need time to write it up and need to be informed along with the original author on issue that may impact on the article.

Namoa Article: The original author for this is the same with Aleamotu'a article and this article conflict with the Aleamotu'a article as the original author used a source that is not independent and can not be verified. I have proposed a deletion for this article and its overdue and no admin have make a decision on it. Does the delete need to be carried out or I need to resolve dispute between the editor. Attempt to resolve dispute have not come any closer as the other editor stick to her source which is biased and can not be verified independently. What option shall I take. Thanks Puakatau (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Undid your Edit here.

Hello Pope, I undid the edit you made to Zeny & Zory when you removed the BLP Unsourced tag. The article is lacking references per WP:CITE. References are Cited within the article and are listed in a reference section with {{reflist}}. External links may become references but only with citations. Also, sources have to be reliable per Wikipedia:Verifiability.

So just because an article has external links, does not mean that it has References. Hope this Helps!QuAzGaA 14:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC).

I know the rules. Just because the link is incorrectly formatted or placed in the wrong section, it is still a reference - no wikirule can change that. It's not ideal, not preferable, but it is still a reference. I'd love every ref to be perfectly formatted using cite templates, but they aren't. But at least those two are still alive, so they qualify for BLP... unlike one of your other edits.The-Pope (talk) 15:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• You are right on my other edits, that has since been corrected, but still has no relevancy to this discussion. If you have a difference of opinion on the definition of or for a Wikipedia reference, Feel free to discuss this on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. Cheers!QuAzGaA 15:37, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

BTW, thank you for adding those references and improving upon the Zeny & Zory article. This is the true purpose of the BLP Tags. QuAzGaA 15:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thats the point. I didn't add refs, I simply stuck < refs > around them and moved them. Technically you are correct. But put yourself in a new editors' eyes and they see that you've put "doesn't have any" and "needs more" tags at the top... and they think, but it's got 4 at the bottom! We know that two self published are useless, but the other two were OK - as far as I could tell - maybe they aren't reliable either. I stick to "no footnotes" and ref improve when there are refs, but put in the links section. The-Pope (talk) 15:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

thanks again and thats a big help

Puakatau (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Talk pages

Whoops! I'm a dope and did forget. Thank you. - Vianello (Talk) 20:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Not sure

What to do - maybe pass the issue to an active admin who has BLP sensitivity - sorry I have real life issues otherwise I'd... SatuSuro 12:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Jakiw Palij

Excuse me but I do not understand the bizarre and offensive nature of your message to me. I have never seen such a message since 2005. I am submitting the article for review for WP:AFD to be reviewed by my peers. And how dare you blank the page. There is something very wrong with this picture. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please unblank the page so I can proceed. Thanks. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I checked the edit history. I created the page as a redirect to Jaroslaw Bilaniuk. [[User>TML]] made it an article in its own right. Please unblank so I can add reflinks. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Nelson Cunningham

I see you recently deleted Nelson Cunningham as non-notable. I would agree that the article was uncited, and needed work, but I think the subject was notable and should not have been speedied on this basis.

I had started this article as a stub 6 years ago when our citation standards were much lower, and really hadn't been back to it since. I would say, though, that there are a few things that clearly take him over the threshold of notability:

• General Counsel of the Senate Judiciary Committee (I believe '93-'95)
• Advisor in the Clinton White House 1995-98
• Co-founder of McLarty Associates, where Henry Kissinger was also an original partner.

Again, the article had problems, and I have no time to work on it now, but I think this was the wrong basis for deletion, especially because it suggests that re-creation (with citation) would still miss the notability benchmark. - Jmabel | Talk 22:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

They are jobs. I've got one too. Provide verifiable evidence of notability from reliable sources and almost every admin on this site will help you recreate the article. I'm not an admin, so I can't do anything - I only nominated it - User:DGG, probably the most experienced editor on this site in regards to BLP notability, actually agreed with me and deleted it. Maybe I'm missing something about how important white office staffers are, but to me, lawyers and office workers are generally not notable, unless good references prove otherwise. The-Pope (talk) 23:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I am an admin. But this is not where I'm focused now. Again, this was uncited (my own contribution was in 2004, when we rarely bothered citing anything) and it's no great loss for the moment. It may not meet our current BLP standards, and I have no problem with the deletion (since I have no time right now to bring it up to standard). However, usually when something is deleted as non-notable, that means an article shouldn't be re-created, and in this case I think one should be if someone has the time to work on it properly. - Jmabel | Talk 05:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

I really can;t explain what I might have been thinking. I seem to have made an error, and I have undeleted. I would be prepared to argue that General Counsel to a House or Senate committee is of sufficient practical power in the US as to be notable. "Advisor", however, requires some more definite documentation. the article also badly needs sources, and I have so marked it. If you can;t quickly find sources, I suggest your request deletioon using db-self and reinstate it when you do have them. DGG ( talk ) 06:49, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth Skinner

Hey, not sure what happened on your edit to Elizabeth Skinner, here, but you seem to have accidentally not closed your ref and also removed the DEFAULTSORT and all the categories. Jenks24 (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Editing from a phone does strange things sometimes. Like earlier, it didn't give me a edit conflict on the Tuck article. I'll fix it. thanks for letting me know.The-Pope (talk) 16:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Dudley Watson

I've stubbed Dudley Watson and restored the unref BLP tag... the sole source given was basically an attack page by a disgruntled sheep farmer that was in conflict with Watson and the unions. Considering the contentious nature of the claims (and indeed the contentious nature of the work that Mr. Watson was involved in), I think we need to insist on high quality sources (and sourcing) here. Gigs (talk) 15:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I admit I didn't check out the ref properly... but I just think that you probably also need to remove the ext links if they aren't good enough to be refs, or make sure that they are really relevant to the subject. The-Pope (talk) 15:55, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

What you did looks good to me. Gigs (talk) 16:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Minor Counties cricketers

CfD It was a speedy discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy that I added a few days ago. If you're correct (and I've no doubt that you are), you may need to post there again. Is the term "cricketer" preferred or simply "player"? I know that "player" is preferred over "footballer"... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Shirt58's talk page.
Message added 08:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Tim1357's talk page.
Message added 02:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I replied on my talk page. Tim1357 ^talk 02:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

And again. Tim1357 ^talk 23:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of 2010 Kalgoorlie-Boulder earthquake for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article 2010 Kalgoorlie-Boulder earthquake, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Kalgoorlie-Boulder earthquake until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bidgee (talk) 08:18, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for the help

Thanks for pointing that out, i'll keep that in mind in future, but there's a lot of missing citiations, as well as a lack of inline cites on the page. A lot of the references on Grandmaster Jay are also unreliable-looking as far as i can see, linking to forums, dead pages, or simply to wiki-mirror pages. -Evaristé93 (talk) 06:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at 1234r00t's talk page.
Message added 01:18, 30 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at OSX's talk page.
Message added 13:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yusuke Minoguchi...

Please don't delete Yusuke Minoguchi article, I am working on it. --Dantas 16:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantasu (talk • contribs)

cripes

just doing one blp issue can be enough for the night - how do you do it all? SatuSuro 13:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm starting to wonder myself. Some I don't mind, if I see that there is some true notability, others I just choose at random, others, like Jonesy are just funny. I probably prefer the "backroom" meta stuff anyway. I guess the other thing is I've never been one to edit at the "GA/FA" end of articles, so I don't mind improving the bottom end of articles - a little. I'm no longer going much past one or two refs and checking for BLP issues or copyvios. The-Pope (talk) 13:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I like doing ones of people I know or have known - it's a buzz knowing I have no COI issues - but can still trawl for what is up there about them - 'sfunny feeling - checking out what is out there about some of them :) SatuSuro 13:32, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

gawks the one liner indonesian soccer player onslaught never ends :( SatuSuro 00:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Definition of BLP

Well, I did the revert in good faith, not knowing that the person had already died. Thanks for pointing out my mistakes but next time mind to take a look at a user's contributions first before asking him/her to re-read something that he/she might already knew. And for your information it is totally impolite to ask someone (especially to a regular who had started more than 100 BLPs!) to take a special note of what the "L" in "BLP" stands for. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 18:44, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's okay. At least you did the right thing. Thanks again for pointing out my mistakes, i'll surely be more careful in tagging articles in the future. Have fun in clearing the uBLP's backlog. Cheers! Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 01:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 08:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

RL Players

Hey Pontiff, yes that Encyclopedia will have the playing career stat on most of these players and I'm happy to add a citation if they're in the book. Some of them are certainly obscure - Mike Wylie played one game only for Penrith in 1968 !. Do you think that one Published Ref will render the article a Keep ? If so I can add an InfoBox , albeit scant on detail.-Sticks66 11:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

BTW what's the shortcut to leave a TalkBack message on your page whilst keeping the response thread on my talk page ?-Sticks66 11:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

RE:

Please don't delete the page of Danilo Mariotti and Roberto Mariotti. --Burning Desire (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Steve Koroknay

Steve Koroknay has been the CEO of three ASX-listed oil companies, all of which were acquired by other companies through takeovers. He appears to be currently a director of four companies listed on the ASX. He has been on the boards of directors of ASX-listed companies since at least 1987. He has been a member of the board of the oil industry's trade association, APPEA. In my judgment this establishes notability to the necessary degree. (unsigned by Eregli bob 01:30, 13 October 2010)

refcheck

she;s a new user , and Im trying to mentor here. She;'s moving faster than i expected, * I cannot always keep up with her, so I think you for your good advice to her. She'll learn soon enough that we dont always agree in detail, and that may things here can be done in different ways. I have been encourging her to enter references in the simplest way possible, and learn the details later, which she will. I havent the least objection if you help teach her those.

But what she doesn't know yet, * in my case it took me many months to learn, is the details of WP:N and WP:RS.--and especially the judgement for when to not bother truing to source something because it is hopeless snyway---things that are second nature to you and to me. Please be tolerant of her errors, and if you think Im telling her something really wrong, come directly to me. Thanks for the help. DGG ( talk ) 06:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the background - as it's fairly rare to see a new editor jump straight into referencing, I thought I'd help her with the key why (WP:V), what (WP:RS) and how (WP:CITE) guides. I am still curious to see if it really is a new editor, or if it's another "undercover investigation" like some have done in the past. Thought I'd take the WP:AGF approach anyway. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 08:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club

Since you are on my side, can you please show Maggies1870 that The Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club was established in 1997 as a new Port Adelaide side to take over the original with keeping the same SANFL history. GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 23:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Unreferenced BLPs

I hadn't noticed that this page already existed, but I'm wondering what the purpose of this is? What advantage does it have over the individual work group lists and the new project list? PC78 (talk) 17:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

It's not terribly important, but I would appeciate an answer to my question. PC78 (talk) 17:08, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, for the delay, I use it in WP:AWB or Excel, in conjunction with the other "combinations" (listed below) to generate lists of "under allocated" articles, or combine it with all the lists below to compare against the master Category:All unreferenced BLPs to come up with a "unallocated articles" list. There has been a bit of a problem recently, though, with transclusions not being updated daily, so I've drifted away from using it that much. A comparison of the new, daily generated page with the old transcluded page would show articles with WPBIO tags, but no taskforces allocated. The other "combined project lists" that I use are:

• Sports and games
• Regional and political
• Music
• Everything else (Art, Entertainment, Religion, Science etc)

Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 00:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Note

Just to let you know, you didn't finish your sentence at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joyce Ching. Guoguo12--Talk--  20:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

E/C

We edit conflicted over at URBLP. I went ahead and pasted where I was going with it at the bottom. I like what you are doing too. We can probably integrate our edits. I was concerned that I was putting too much emphasis on tasks not directly related to sourcing, so I like your division. Gigs (talk) 02:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I think I mostly merged our conflict now. Gigs (talk) 02:51, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I was toying with the idea of something like {{Progress_meter}} ... but I can't think of how to use it without picking an arbitrary higher limit like 30,000. Really we need an inverted version that has the rounded bar going the other way so that it looks like the positive progress is toward zero. Gigs (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello User:The-Pope, You and a number of others, are invited by User:Sp33dyphil to help him cleanup and significantly improve the articles that he’d edited and will edit. The articles involved are airline alliances, such as SkyTeam, Oneworld and Star Alliance. He will be improving and expanding shoe and clothes manufacturing companies, namely Puma AG, Addidas and Nike, Inc.. Airline articles will also be edited, along with Australian rules football and related clubs. You do not nee’ to know these subjects; but you could help

• copyedit the articles, as well as improving the English in the involved further.
• format the references by inserting citation templates. Please go to WP:CITET, or go to his contributions page to see how he has been carrying out this job.
• add appropriate and relevant pictures and media deemed necessary.
• merge and tighten paragraphs. Since there are numerous one- and two-sentence paragraphs, merging these together helps editors afterwards add information.
• wikification.

Please disregard the following section if you are busy. Only concentrate on the jobs above.

If you have time, you could further help by:

• adding pictures/media of the involved subjects to Wiki Commons.
• bringing together quotes regarding those who direct or hold significant relationships with organisations such as Greenpeace, SkyTeam, Oneworld, Star Alliance, Puma AG, Adidas, Nike, Inc. and Australian rules football/soccer clubs.
• finding press releases, news articles, etc. for Star Alliance and Vietnam Airlines, which don’t have a lot of information during their early days.

Once you have embarked on the activities above, please drop User:Sp33dyphil a message at his user page.

And of course, if you have any jobs for Sp33dyphil, just drop him a message.

“ No pain, no gain. ”

Please distribute this message among other Wikipedians

(Spammed by 203.45.152.251 (talk) at 06:24, 1 November 2010)

Subby Valentine

Hi Pope. Just wondering, did you intentionally remove these categories dif, or was that just a typo of sorts? It left my somewhat unsure of how much content to restore when I went to fix the cite-error.  -- WikHead (talk) 20:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Editing from a phone has some downsides. To date I've noticed (might need to stick it in a disclaimer box at the top of this page!):

1. Section edits can become whole article edits
2. Doesn't like long sections - can truncate the end of them
3. Edit conflicts can happen without warnings
4. Smaller screen means that it's harder to check when the problem happens.

I'll have a look at the other sections I removed... but it probably actually isn't such a bad thing to remove an unreferenced list like that. Thanks for letting me know The-Pope (talk) 23:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Sorry about that. Got a question about the bot. Currently there are more than 100 projects related to US topics and only a handful have pages. In addition to the ones who have opted for their own page would it be possible to look at using Category:United States for WikiProject United States rather than just the few that are currently listed in the WPUS template? This will allow visibility of all US related people. If that's too big how about Category:American people? Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 05:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

What we could make is a "US topic page", which transcludes all of the US related lists onto a single page. I've done similar for sports, music, entertainment etc - see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Unreferenced_Biographies_of_Living_Persons/UBLPs_by_music as an example. Catscan doesn't work for really big cats, and these DASHBot list only work nicely on a single cat, not the whole tree.The-Pope (talk) 07:03, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks. American people is definately a big category. Somewhere over 100K actually. Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/WikiProject embassy has all the US related projects I know about but there are several that probably wont have any BLP's. Do you need me to put them on a separate page?--Kumioko (talk) 13:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll start the page, if you think that more projects should be added, then feel free to add them. I'll put the page at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/US related unreferenced BLPs. If you think it should be moved, then do so. I'll add some links to it from some of the other pages too. The-Pope (talk) 15:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

That page name is perfect thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, that's  Done. If you use WP:AWB you can now do a "links on page" import to get the total number of UBLPs in all of the different projects - it will discard the duplicates. I didn't put the WP:Baseball or WP:Basketball lists as they will have lots of non-US players in them, I only provided a link. The easiest way to add more projects is first of all add them to the DASHBot page - the easiest way is to cut and paste from another line -(I notice that I forgot Wyoming!) and then add them to the US-related page. Do you want do the Wyoming page? You don't have to actually create the page, DASHBot will do that tomorrow when it runs (at about 0500 UTC). The-Pope (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow thats awesome, this will help a lot thanks. I will try and do that last one myself and let you know once I am done...or ask for help. Since I am new to this bot I would like to ask a couple questions just so I understand if thats ok:

1. I notice that the Military History US, ACW ARW task forces arent on there nor is the Films/American cinema, I figure thats probably because they are task forces and not projects but Im not sure..is that true?
2. Right now WPUS only has about 12000 articles in it but I forsee that growing exponentially over the next several months. The max I see is about 400K which is about half of WP Biography but is that going to be a problem?
3. Are there any bots or tools currently that will assist in the cleanup of these unreferenced BLP's. Maybe on e thatadd References to an article that you know of? I think the answer is probably no but Im not sure so I thought I would ask. --Kumioko (talk) 16:30, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

If the task forces have a single cat that holds the articles, then yes, you can add them to the User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects page, exactly same as most of the African countries and Indian/Australian task forces are done. The way to check is to go to an article that you know is in the task force, and look at the cats on the Talk page. In this case, Category:United_States_military_history_task_force_articles is full of articles, so yes, it can be used. Read the instructions on the Dashbot page and give it a go. Just remember category based lists are on one page, Template based lists (ie Wyoming) are on the other page. If you find a cat with only subcats, such as Category:WikiProject British Columbia articles (a task force of the WP:Canada project), then you can't use it, unless you can convince the banner template to be changed. I've learnt a lot about projects and templates doing this! I'm off to bed now, but I'll check it all in the morning before it runs again. The-Pope (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Wyoming seems fine, BTW, I'll add the US military one.The-Pope (talk) 23:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for all the help. --Kumioko (talk) 23:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

AFL talk page

So what do you want me to do? This user is stalking me and being noisy and telling other users about my past. I'm sick of it. Reporting it doesn't do anything. What do you think then? What should I do? GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 14:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Your history is public. Your past behavior is visible to anybody who wants to look. You cannot change or hide it - it isn't necessarily stalking. If you think someone is unfair, attacking you or not being civil, then bring it up with the editor at their talk page or at one of the dispute pages. Note that at the dispute resolution pages, your actions are likely to be examined as well. The-Pope (talk) 04:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah sure, it won't do anything. It's just an trolling ip vandal. Wanting me to comeback at it. Seriously, I think I've had enough of this. I'm going to retire for good soon. Because wikipedia is just a place for losers who are too gutless to come out their house and face reality, so they come on a social website to talk about how terrible their loves are. And it is stalking when they do bring it up when it has got nothing to do with it. The reason I was like that was for the very same reason thats going on now. GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 07:45, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Top reporter!

Thank you for your note about David Cohen crime reporter. I did not write it. But it is heartening someone thinks highly of my work. Davidcohen (talk) 00:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

hahahah SatuSuro 13:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bryce Retzlaff comment + more

Hi, Your Goaliness,
Thanks for your comment in that AfD. I could have saved a few bytes and just written, "what The-Pope said". Out of interest, was that you adding sagacious and well-informed opinion here? Our dear friend and colleague, the Golden Gibbon Himself also appears to pop in discussion of articles. Anyways, thank the Cricket and Football Gods that the incredibly boring period between the end of the footy season and the beginning of the cricket season is over. And thank you, again.
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I have an impersonator... or maybe they follow that other European guy with the cool hats and lots of devotees. Wasn't me that time - I do sometimes post news website comments, but not often and under a variety of names - normally whatever I think of at the time!The-Pope (talk) 11:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

An Anti-pope perhaps? Strewth, without live streaming of footy and cricket, no wonder they got bored and had all these schisms and whatnot. Luckily these days, our religion sports are without any blemish of corruption. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:35, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hooper and copyvio

Hey there, I got notified on my talk that Andrew Hooper was "nuked due to copyvio" and asked to help as I was the only other contributer to the article. So, I have two questions: a) although it seems that the copyvio stuff was all added User:Jackson Consiglio, do you know if anything I added was a copyvio violation? and b) seeing as the article is in your userspace, do you mind if I work on it a little if I get some spare time before you happen to? (But if the answer to part a is "yes, the copyvio is all your fault", don't worry I won't edit it ;) Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 15:35, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

• a) don't know - haven't looked into it yet, but I did warn Jacko about numerous image copyvios.
• b) don't mind - I've been busy in RL, so please jump in on the save if you can. Just ensure you do actually delete & rewrite and don't just close paraphrase.The-Pope (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

In case you're interested, Andrew Hooper has been recreated (not by me). Jenks24 (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Please be more careful with your tagging

Technically, you are correct. But the two references serve just one half of a line of text on one of the subject's compositions. The rest of the entire page - biography and 43 other works - is totally unreferenced. In the circumstances, refimprove hardly seemed appropriate! Emeraude (talk) 12:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Helen Swindells

A few days ago, you tagged the article Helen Swindells for speedy deletion on the basis that it violated WP:BLP. It was accordingly deleted the next day. I agree that — in the form that you saw the article — it was a violation of policy and subject to deletion. However, I had originally created the article as a redirect to Broadway Hotel (Portland, Oregon); it was only later converted to a biographical article by another editor. I would have preferred that the article, rather than being deleted, be reverted to its original function as a redirect.

"Broadway Hotel" is the original name of a historic building in Portland, Oregon, USA. It currently goes under the name "Helen M. Swindell Apartments", or informally "the Helen Swindells". Thus the reason for the redirect. To the best of my knowledge, the Broadway Hotel is completely unconnected to the Helen Swindells who was the subject of the biographical article.

Do you have any objection if I recreate the Helen Swindells article in its original form as a redirect? I have no interest in recreating the biographical article. Thanks.

— Ipoellet (talk) 19:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

BLP Barnstar

		The BLP Barnstar
		For scoring a mighty zero!! And for being such an encouragement to others doing uBLPs. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but 3 more hours to see if I actually get the zero! Been so close for so long.The-Pope (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Tremendous effort mate. –Moondyne 02:38, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

And we still don't have a zero - a bloody rugby league player, which already had an incorrectly formatted ref and nominated by one of the few editors I've had a dispute with! Tomorrow... (and I'll try to check beforehand!)The-Pope (talk) 06:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Agh, bangs head. Got burnt with that one. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 12:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

At least it was zero for 1 day. You seem to be making an effort to indentify new Australian uBLPs. Is that something new now the figure is low? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 17:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Philip A. White for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Philip A. White, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip A. White until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Montanabw^(talk) 05:17, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Proud Loyal Passionate.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Proud Loyal Passionate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

UncleG suggestion

Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Mass blanking/How to help. It's a little misleading in it's name but I think it would be worth re-reading this with the idea of giving a trial a go. It seems to me a way of keeping the article while making it unreadable until it's referenced. Just my 2cents. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Rock Groups

Hi, I was wondering if you could get a list of the uBLPs that are also in the category musical groups..... ϢereSpielChequers 21:09, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject list

Could Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects be updated for the new month. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:19, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

 DoneThe-Pope (talk) 15:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Seems a pattern with sports reducing nicely and musician reduction slow. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 16:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Unreferenced means no references

You have a point there. Strictly speaking, links in the External links section are not to be considered references, but one of the two banners you suggested would indeed have been more appropriate. I could have simply renamed the section to "Sources", but without inspecting its content, that would not have been a good idea either. In fact, it all boils down to this: I saw a BLP that was not supposed to be "sourced" like that, but I guess I was a bit too lazy (or sloppy, or whatever) to handle it in a better way. GregorB (talk) 11:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. At the end of the day, there is a difference between being "right" and doing what is the best in a particular situation, so your objection is still a valid one. GregorB (talk) 11:36, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

NPP

Great minds must think alike. At the time you were leaving your message on the uBLP page I was having a chat with WereSpielChequers. I've been concerned with this problem for quite a while. The NPP project as such, is all but dead, but there is clearly something that needs to be done.--Kudpung (talk) 16:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Olympic medal!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You deserve an Olympic medal for all the BLP sourcing you did for WP:WikiProject Olympics Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Referencing request

Hey there, much to my continual annoyance, I don't own The Encyclopedia of AFL Footballers. Anyway, I've spent a bit of time cleaning up the articles that User:Mileskane7 created and it seems fairly obvious that he got a lot of his info from the above mentioned book. So I was hoping, when you had time you could go through Clarence Abbott, Roy Adam, Arthur Adamson, Jack Adamson, Bob Addison, Ray Allsop, William Angwin, Bud Annand, Jacob Anstey, Ian Aston and Graeme Atkins and add a quick ref. (shockingly I figured out he was working alphabetically ;). At the moment all they have is the rleague ref, which I don't think is considered a reliable source (dunno why). Anyway, no rush, as I know you're busy with WP:URBLP. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a look over the weekend. As for the Encyc book, I've only got a fairly old one (2002), which for wiki work is fine, as anything newer is generally available online, so look for it at second hand book shops or even drop some hints for Christmas! Between keeping an eye on and cleaning up the new draftee articles, UBLPs and this stuff... isn't this meant to be the off season! Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 16:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Brisbane "rookie list" players

Hey, thanks for the message but I am slightly confused. Do you specifically mean no articles about players on the "Rookie list" (from memory, I haven't created any) or no articles about any AFL player yet to debut? If it is the latter, does this refer to the more highly regarded first round picks as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBrownDog (talk • contribs) 09:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Some want to delete all yet to debut players, I tend to think draft picks from the first couple of rounds are more likely to notable, rookie listers much less so. Ultimately until they debut, they are all questionable, unless they have significant, not trivial, coverage in independent sources. Claye Beams was the one I was concerned about - I didn't notice that he had been elevated, and his brother helps too. I just wanted to ensure you weren't planning to do the whole list!The-Pope (talk) 10:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Michael Beer

Hello! Your submission of Michael Beer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nick-D (talk) 10:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec10/Balloon}} to your friends' talk pages.

William Jeremiah Gates

Have you looked at the link properly? Where does it say he reached the semifinals? (He was in the first round, then lost in the repêchage.) The source is also pretty flimsy on "competed in the late 1960s"; for all we know he competed for a longer time than that but only took part in the one single Olympic Games. You can't possibly be serious in treating that as a valid reference for the article because it pretty much only references his DOB. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 15:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

It verifies the fact that he competed in the Olympics - I haven't found any issues with that site whenever I've checked it against the official reports (http://www.la84foundation.org/6oic/OfficialReports/1968/1968v3pt2.pdf, p691 (p202 of the pdf) in this case, and the official report uses semi-final, but it is a repecharge, as the first round losers went in it). I think even coming last at the Olympics is a pretty big deal, and I'd say that it means that he is notable by the current standards. I'd agree that the article needs more info, but so do the other half a million biographical stubs. It therefore does not deserve a BLP unreferenced tag on it. I'm sick of people thinking that BLP unref is the topic de jour so lets put other problem articles into that bucket so that they won't be ignored. There are a bunch of cleanup tags out there that are more appropriate than BLP unsourced in this case. The-Pope (talk) 15:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Beer

Materialscientist (talk) 06:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

James Horley AfD

Invite your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Horley (3rd nomination). --Falcadore (talk) 00:53, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

And for your comments and input and the appealing style and manner in which you get your point(s) across over here. I very much appreciate what is both forthright and composed in your suggestions on my talk page. No condescension. Instead, you pointed out exactly what I was looking for when I made my appeal at the BLP board. I will have to do some work, research and referencing, to determine if there is justification for getting the Dewey Bunnell stand-alone article back up again and you showed me where to look (I think there is justification, but I'll need to find the documentation, and see if it will "jibe" with what is required). Thanks for helping me and contributing to what makes Wikipedia a place that could live up to its potential. Christian Roess (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Ho ho and happ new year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Perth/6 any chance we might see you then? SatuSuro 02:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

No chance I'm sorry... Other things on that weekend, but I've heard that the beer prices at the Raffles are daylight robbery (maybe User:Moondyne feels some brotherhood with them!) and if I did go I'd have to be in disguise anyway... only Julian Assange knows who I really am! Have fun! The-Pope (talk) 04:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha (or should that be ho ho oops?) Oh well we will have to out you some other time with a Godzilla mask? thanks for the tip re the robbery issue - maybe we take our tinnies from woollies and sit by the river or something else - cheers and all the best with the new year whatever you might do with it SatuSuro 04:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Notability of clergymen

Hi, I started a discussion as to the notability of clergymen at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Clergymen, your input is welcome. J04n(talk page) 15:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but as I state on my user page, despite my username, I have no interest whatsoever in religion articles. As I just said at the AfD... add a ref, remove the BLP unsourced tag and I'll probably never look at that page again! The-Pope (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

J04n(talk page) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec10/Balloon}} to your friends' talk pages.