Jump to content

User talk:Al E./Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Wrathchild, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! , Los Esqueakis 19:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

New Jawa Order

Hi Aeverett... just so you know, if a case like New Jawa Order, just put a {{delete}} on the page, and sysops will be there on the double. Thanks for ID'ing it as fake though. I clued in once I saw that Anakin Skywalker was "killed" in the incidents of the story. BTW, if you ever need any help, just call on me or any other sysop, we'd love to help out. -- user:zanimum


Goln

'Advertising' is not a speedy deletion criterion under the WP:CSD - if you want this article gone (and I'm sympathetic to that) please go to WP:AFD. Thanks --Doc (?) 20:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Somebody tagged it for importance and cleanup, so I'll wait to see what happens there. Al 00:18, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Then again...

Palooza

I redirected You're a looza, if you don't know what a palooza is... because it's not actually nonsense by Wikipedia definition. It's possible it'll be speedied anyway, you never know. My plan was, redirect it, wait for Palooza to be deleted, and then put the redirect up for speedy deletion due to not having a target. Friday (talk) 17:22, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I reverted it because whoever put the AfD tag on it didn't complete the process. The whole lot has been speedied by now. Al 18:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

User:131.109.1.250

This user has continued to vandalize after your warning, and another person's. S/he defaced the main star wars page as seen in its history. Thanks. The Wookieepedian 13:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flemington Circle

If you oppose the deletion of the article, I suggest you record your vote as the others have on the page so that the admins can easily identify it. (That is, add a bullet headed by Keep formatted just like that, and add any applicable discussion.)

Welcome to Wikipedia (since you've been here almost two months and no one has said it yet) and thank you for your support! TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:45, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I forgot to record my vote. And I did get a welcome a couple of months ago. I just decided to clear my talk page.
  • By the way, what is the thing about traffic circles and New Jersey? From what I gather, there were a fair number of badly designed traffic circles built there in the twenties and thirties and people have been swearing at them ever since. I know that roundabouts (to use UK terminology) aren't popular at all in the US and are only now being introduced (a couple of DOTs have brochures in the web to explain them to road users), but NJ seems a special case. Pilatus 22:25, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Good question. Roundabouts are only starting to come into vogue. In fact, there's two of them here in my new "hometown" of Brunswick, MD. Traffic Circles, though, are huge compared to roundabouts. When they were first put in New Jersey was well-populated but not nearly like it is now. The idea was to let people get through these intersections without having to slow down. Probably okay at the time, but as traffic increased it just got worse and worse. The Somerville Circle, for instance (close to where I grew up) was (in)famous for averaging more than 1 motor vehicle accident a day. They are a fairly unique feature of New Jersey; I don't see very many circles or even roundabouts outside of New Jersey, but there were easily half a dozen in New Jersey I used to deal with regularly. (Some are gone now.) Just as unique a road feature: The jughandle. I just don't see them outside of New Jersey. Al 23:14, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
The Somerville Circle was especially notorious, not only because of the accidents but because before I-78 was completed it was often the first one encountered by travellers from out-of-state, who had naturally never seen one before. And it was among the worst of them. A common problem was to get stuck on the inside lane and be trapped there for several laps before you could get to the outside and off. It got so bad that before the flyover was constructed to bypass it, metering lights were installed at the feeders -- which caused backups on the highways, but at least fewer accidents on the circle.
The Flemington Circle is problematic in its own way. At Somerville it was at least understood that traffic on the circle had the right-of-way, just as with a roundabout. At Flemington (as you can see from the aerial photo) not only is the feeder pattern rather complex, but one side is flattened to allow northbound (actually north-east bound) traffic on U.S. Highway 202 to pass directly through, meaning that traffic on the circle does not always have the right of way. It's a very difficult circle to navigate as a result, even though it has only one lane in places.
The other two circles in the area are much more lightly travelled and clearly non-notable. They're not even named as far as I know. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:12, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Actually, the Somerville Circle never had the circle traffic getting right-of-way. Before the flyover, 202-206 southbound traffic had right-of-way into the circle (and it still does) and 202 northbound did as well. I also remember that accidents on the Somerville Circle actually went up right after the flyover was completed. (I grew up in Bridgewater. It was a right of passage when learning to drive to learn how to navigate the Circle. Al 12:16, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
That's odd, because I remember clearly how I used to drive it even before the metering lights were installed, many years before the flyover went in. (I grew up in Branchburg.) Traffic on the circle itself never yielded; traffic coming in did. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:23, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I grew up in Bridgewater, and my first traffic accident was on the Circle. It's been a mess for a long time. Al 20:31, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Your signature

I notice that your signature is formatted to appear as "AI". You might want to reconsider this so that people don't confuse you with the controversial User:AI. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Spam tags

Ooooh...I didn't know there was that db-spam tag. Thanks. --216.191.200.1 12:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's deprecated now. —Wrathchild (talk) 02:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

please don't delete the saugeen stripper article

It is legitimate as per my comments on the page itself.

Tokyojoe2002 21:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I have responded on your talk page. You can call me Al 16:02, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

oxxiox

Thank you for your impartial and fair contributions to the discussion on the saugeen stripper page, it is appreciated. -Oxxiox 20:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Over 30

Over30club is more for CS and DoD rather than Planetside but your still more than welcome to join us --Jsmp01 16:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Dmoz

Template:Dmoz has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Dmoz. Thank you. Adrian Buehlmann 15:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Username change

Your request has been fulfilled. Regards — Dan | talk 20:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thumbshot

Are you aware of WP:3RR? Step back, let an admin help you out. pfctdayelise 05:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Moving articles on afd

When you move an article that's on afd, could you please create a redirect from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewTitle to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OldTitle instead of moving the afd discussion? My bot can account for redirected afd discussions automatically, but it can't detect moved ones, and there isn't really an easy way to make it do so. —Cryptic (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. Is there anything I can do to fix what I've broken? --Wrathchild (talk) 17:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
It's not actually broken, per se, in that it works fine for human editors. The problem is that I run a bot every morning to find incompletely-listed afd nominations, and (because of the way the move log is set up) making it be able to detect when an afd nomination subpage has been moved would double its running time and sometimes cause false negatives. —Cryptic (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay. I won't do it again. --Wrathchild (talk) 18:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikidweb

Hi, Let me start by stating that I did not put the reference to wikidweb in the article, but since noticing it, I have been watching it. Anyways, I would like to dispute "full of spam". "Noteworthy" is something that only time can tell, or other Wikipedia editors, but the wiki directory has many anti-spam measures, a small community of editors, and is fairly spam free. I also figure you're a bit biased, as you are a dmoz editor, but that also means you can talk about directories with some authority. I'm trying to overcome some (perceived, at least) shortcomings of dmoz in the wiki directory. So, as a dmoz editor, I'd love to get your input. Stop on by and check it out.  :-) --Aerik 02:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll respond on your talk page. --Wrathchild (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Wrathchild - thanks for continuing the discussion. I'm not looking for an argument (in the bad sense of the word), but I think you have judged me, and the site, too harshly. I will note try to convince you that the site is "notworthy", but I get a very strong impression that you think I am just catering to website owners. I also feel that you are, at least somewhat, laying out some bad PR for me, and I would like to convince you of my intentions and in the process stop the bad PR. On my talk page, you mentioned the Wikipedia link policy - let me reiterate that I did not link to my site, nor author any part of the Web directory article - your comments left the impression that you thought I had violated a policy, when in fact, I did nothing, and I don't think the author violated any policy anyway (the text did not link to the site, it was just text). I can appreciate the policies about links as I, like any good wikizen, abhor spam, and I am currently contributing ideas on Wikitech-L to develop anti-spam filters.
In regards to your example of spammy sites listed in the directory - I'm sure there are lots of useless, crummy sites listed in the directory. My goals are to be inclusive - on the other end of the spectrum from DMOZ - that a site is "good enough to be listed until proven otherwise". This policy does appear to favor webmasters, but my philosophy is that most sites have some unique value somewhere. Certainly there are a few that are just garbage, and when I have reviewed those, I have declined those listings.
Your comment specifically was "full of spam" which gives the impression that the directory is not watched or edited, which is not the case. Certainly many new listings are not edited - it is a very different thing than Wikipedia - but we do have a small, dedicated community of editors. And I have put in place several filters to promote good content and reduce spam. You'll find very little wiki spam (completely irrelevant links posted in the middle of legitmate content) in the directory, and when it occurs, it is reverted pretty quickly (less than 12 hours, typically).
At this stage of the directory, I am trying to attract new listings - yes, some are garbage, but most are good, useful sites - because a general purpose directory needs to be large to attract surfers, which is the real audience. But I will not get surfers with 100 or 1000 listings. With tens of thousands of listings, surfers will come, appreciating the ability to find listings in multiple categories, review sites, and even re-write or recategorize a listing if it is required - but I need plenty of content first.
When I read your user page (that you are a father, programmer, a dmoz editor, and wikipedia editor), I suspect that we actually have common interests and philosophies. I would love to win you over. Best Regards --Aerik 20:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You seem to have an awful lot invested over a single editing comment. There is no need for you to "win me over." While I am editing here, I try to work in the best interests of Wikipedia. I wish you luck with your endeavors. —Wrathchild (talk) 14:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
You can't underestimate the power of bad PR - I have a lot invested (time, emotion) in the wiki directory. I just really thought that with your background, you might appreciate what I was trying to do - it would have been nice to "win you over". Thanks though, and I'll drop it now.--Aerik 05:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Make it a worthwhile, indispensible, "go-to" resource, and I'll be won over. —Wrathchild (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

WHY are you trying to delete my vitally important article on NAVCRUIT 1133.101?? I realize that it proves that McNeight was rude and obnoxious when he vandalized my contributions---but surely TRUTH and ACCURACY are MORE important than protecting the 'pathetic' rantings of McNeight. (Note: McNeight called ME 'pathetic' first---so if this is a persoanl attack be sure to delete the jackassery of McNeight as well.) Thank you very little. T`sitra Yel Darb 20:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

WTF? "Vitally important"? Yeah, right. It's not worth an encyclopedia article. Nothing personal against you at all. I don't even know who "McNeight" is. Remember the Wikipedia mantra: Assume good faith. —Wrathchild (talk) 20:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to the lunacy. Thanks for adding your $0.02 to the RfC. McNeight 22:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

"Wrathchild-K" <<< PLEASE STOP DELETING THE WORK OF OTHER USERS, OR IT IS YOUR ACCOUNT GOING TO BE DELETED!... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.49.111 (talk • contribs) 19:23, January 27, 2006

Yeah, right. Go for it. Feel free to begin the WP:RFC process. Meanwhile, grow up. —Wrathchild (talk) 13:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


AH---that IP address is in Amsterdam----please explain how you plan to BLAME me in Eau Claire, WISCONSIN for that one?? You all need to take a big step abck and stop jack-booting it all over the place. AMERICA---Land of the free and home to pathetic bullies like McNeight!!!Vinnie von Go 03:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Go harass someone else. —Wrathchild (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Everyone seems to miss the FACT that McNeight was a rude and abusiv eto me before I started my campaign to show the World what an out-of-control individual he truly is. "LOOK at thr record and see HIS rudenes FIRST. With that---to quote the great Bender Rodriguez: Bite my shiny metal ass!!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinnie von Go (talk • contribs) (But actually —Preceding unsigned comment added by Braaad (talk • contribs) )

You might want to read WP:POINT. —Wrathchild (talk) 17:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note

Thanks for the note especially on my name showing up as a region! :o Strawberry Island 05:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Super Bowl XL article

Consistent with your suggestion, for which I thank you, I included the respective overall ranks to the stats chart. Apropos of my source, I copied the statistics from the print versions of USA Today Sports Weekly and The Sporting News. The NFL's website, though, has a better compendium, and we perhaps will put a footnote to that. Joe 05:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Welcome

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. When editing Wikipedia, you have to have an edit summary. Furthermore, when reverting another user's edits you should comment on the talkpage to explain your reversion. Randomly referring to good-faith edits as vandalism is just childish. You will not succeed on WP:RFA by violating WP:3RR. Growup. 165.247.91.219 21:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Harrassed twice in as many weeks. I guess I'm getting popular. —Wrathchild (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Matt Soos

I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. Although it is highly unlikely, a "famous theologian" (who would be turning 18 this year) is a claim of notability. As it stands, I'll leave it as a test case for Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 19:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Sudoku

In the External Link section: I don't understand, if the Sudoku Programmers link can be there, then what's wrong with a link to a Sudoku Solver implemented using computer spreadsheet software? --Zero0w Feb 11 2006

First, read Talk:Sudoku. Then read WP:SPAM. Do you know how many links we have to trim from that article on a daily basis? If we allow one or two, reasoning says, we have to allow them all. Like any fad, Sudoku has been glommed on by get-rich-quick schemers everywhere. Do you know how trivially easy it is to put up a site with a few Sudoku puzzles from a third party, some ads, and rake in the money? Anyway, links to external sites are better submitted to places that specialize in them, such as the Open Directory Project. —Wrathchild (talk) 15:26, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Is the BBC trying to shape Wikipedia in its own immage ?

Hi, you said if I had any troubles, well I may be just may not be correct here but, after stewing on this one for maybe about a week, I am still POed, and maybe need some feedback: I think Wikiwoohoo (I may have the user name spelled incorrectly since it would not link) is some sort of BBC proxy or sockpuppet or something which they are using to control content here, and I tripped over him (Grant is what editor claimed to be his name was which maybe is not even relevant here) while ham-handedly trying to do an article about a BBC News Anchor. I'm quite sure that she (the BBC News Anchor-Martine Croxall) took offense to my article. There may actually have been very little in the article that was offensive, and most of that (if it even was offensive) was in the talk section (and honestly there was no true intent on my own part to actually be offensive). Some of this stuff was perhaps relevant biographical info that I guess for some reason the BBC or the News Anchor itself appearantly doesn't want in Wikipedia. After some series of constant deletions from Wikiwoohoo, I finally saw what had happened to the article, and began a discussion. Simply from the tone of this editor I was pretty certain that I wasn't getting the chance to have any sort of say as to the content or tone. I tried very unhappily to at least figure from where this mess was going how to have a little give and take, but after trying a bit harder than I should have just plain gave up. It may be that I am not all that opposed to the BBC being happy about the articles here about their stuff. 'But, where do they get the right to control Wikipedia content? Maybe this is all hot air, however I was completely quashed, and that was intentional, and I was and am still quite angry about it. Maybe Martine Croxall deserved an appelation (didn't post it though perhaps admitting that I was considering doing so) that came up in my research (happy to share that tidbit if it will help, though it is a bad name based on insulting her name, and well, when I started out I liked her and didn't realize that she wasn't very nice, and really as far as starting a fight or throwing stones, all I want to do is keep her and the BBC from quashing others work [especially mine] even if it isn't perfect).152.163.100.130 17:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)still very inexpert here, I forgot to sign in, sorry, hopefully John5Russell3Finley 18:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I've not been around lately. I only just saw your message. I'll reply on your talk page. —Wrathchild (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Sorry not to be replying earlier, me too with the real world stuff, I guess that the "edit war" was a while ago, and well, I guess I like Martine Croxall and Wikipedia too much to have let the Wikiwoohoo edit stuff drag me and etc down into a conflict, I guess I've gotten over that kind of stuff, when I was doing genealogy I got into some stuff like that, and it doesn't help anybody at all, and it does kind of mar what you are working on which I guess can ruin the thing for the folks you are actually trying to reach. I guess that my posting was more of a heads up than anything else, like maybe this is something to be watching for in case it happens to other contributors. The BBC is not per se a bad thing, but if it gets repressive, well, maybe folks need to be watching for that sort of stuff. Thanks for the reply, John5Russell3Finley 01:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Dark Throne

I don't think the Dark Throne page should be deleted. Why is it being considered for deletion? -- Jowan2005

I'm just the nominator. Discussion should go on the deletion discussion page. —Wrathchild (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
If you don't answer I will assume your AfD message was vandalism and remove it. -- Jowan2005
It is poor etiquette to remove content from a user's talk page. And I did answer. You deleted it. Not nice to make threats, either. —Wrathchild (talk) 03:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, I didn't see that it was moved to the bottom, I thought you took it off. So after a while of what I thought was putting it back on I decided to take it back off to be nice (since I thought you removed it before). As you said "I'm just the nominator", so why did you nominate it? --Jowan2005
My reasons for nominating it are right there on the discussion page. —Wrathchild (talk) 11:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Puzzle spam

As a relatively new Wikipedian, I'd like to understand why you deleted the links on the Puzzle page as spam. The Grey Labyrinth and National Puzzlers' League links are non-commercial, and exist certainly as resources for those interested in puzzles (the latter, in particular, provides both solving resources and historical information). I'm not sure why they are substantively different than the rec.puzzles newsgroup. The two other links, Mind Bogglers and Puzzle Choice seem less informational and more like collections of non-notable puzzles, and I'd agree that they are less appropriately encyclopedic. (Including them sends the page down a slippery slope, where to be complete it would need to link to every page that provides collections of puzzles, which I would agree is not the intention here.) Thanks. --Glp 14:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External links has a couple of points which come to mind. "Links should be kept to a minimum" is one. Under "links to be avoided" is "open wikis" and "personal websites" which fit here. Certainly "Wikipedia is not a web directory" comes to play as well. In my opinion they didn't need to be there and I removed them. Articles are done by consensus, however, so it wouldn't be out of bounds to begin a conversation on the talk page about what links to include. In fact, WP:EL recommends it. —Wrathchild (talk) 14:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Wrathchild. I think your point is well taken, especially regarding both minimal linkage and web-directory-ness. I appreciate the pointers to the Wikipedia info pages as well.--Glp 21:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Segway Geeks
Because of your outstanding contributions to Segway PT and/or Geek, you have been selected for the Wikipedia group Segway Geeks.
File:PTtopview.jpg

Geeklera Segway Geek 21:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Segway Geeks —Wrathchild (talk) 14:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Nerd pride day

As an embassor of the nerd counterculture, I am deeply sorry that you have deleted my reference to the Nerd pride day in the May 25 page. I assume that you did what you had to do, as you thought that as a joke, or irrevelant. Nevertheless, this holiday is a fact. I have already written the article in the English wikipedia (not a realy good one, as I am new here, but I hope it will be improveved by others), but the article in the Spanish wikipedia already existed (although I do not know how to create the link from one wikipedia to the other) as "Día del Orgullo Friki". I ask you not to delete my contribution this time. And if you have to, please let me know what to do to avoid it for the next time. Thank you anyway. LeChimp 21:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as how someone else has already nominated Nerd pride day for nomination I believe my actions were correct. You may wish to brush up on the rules for verifiability. —Wrathchild (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Cumberland, MD

Thanks Wrath...I have put it up to a vote on the Cumberland, Maryland talk page before I do anything, but I will add that as a choice. I honestly wish the links could have been left as was, but we will work something out.

Thanks again! Rock on....SVRTVDude 17:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Retired Numbers New York Giants

I added this to the discussion on the New York Giants Talk Page - I didn't have time to go through all my old programs but apparently "retired" to the Giants doesn't mean someone else can't wear the number, or at least that was the case with the first two, Flaherty and Leemans.

In the back of the Giants 75th Anniversary Book (written by Jerry Izenberg) it has the following section on retired numbers (p.178) #1 Ray Flaherty 1935 (but Frank Cope was #1 in 1946); #4 Tuffy Leemans 1940 (although as mentioned he was #4 through 1943 and Leland Shaffer was #4 in 1945); #7 Mel Hein 1963; #11 Phil Simms 1995; #14 Y.A. Tittle 1965; #32 Al Blozis 1945; #40 Joe Morrison 1972; #41 Charlie Conerly 1962; #50 Ken Strong 1947; #56 Lawrence Taylor 1994 Revmoran 15:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. I'm sure we can incorporate that into the article somehow. —Wrathchild (talk) 19:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rush (1991 film) cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rush (1991 film) cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Dmoz

Hello. I see your vote at the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_15#Template:Dmoz. I agree with you.

Best regards, nejron (talk) 12:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dawn of the Black Hearts

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Dawn of the Black Hearts, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Mdsummermsw (talk) 19:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Ummm...why are you alerting me of this? I've never even contributed to that article? —Wrathchild (talk) 10:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Actually, you were the first registered editor on the article, though I now see it was to suggest a speedy. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 12:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The Witches Hammer

A redirect to the Malleus Maleficarum is likely unsuitable, as although this film is titled The Witches Hammer, that is only a plot device and the film is about the characters and their mission. The goal is tertiary to the story. I have expanded that article and provided a number of genre specific reliable sources. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about ones that show up in the daily log as a red link, like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/asdfghjkl; just because the discussion page hasn't yet been formed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

(I responded on your talk page.)
(Ugh. I prefer to keep conversations in one place, which is why I moved your original response.) I don't see those very often, but I do fix them when I see them. I don't know why you think you're the only one who does. But, yeah, nominating an AfD is kind of an aptitude test. —Wrathchild (talk) 17:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Naomi Elizabeth

This article was vandalized by 71.36.101.63. The reason it needed to be deleted was because the changes made by that person didn't conform to any guidelines and the tone was angry and biased. As of now it has been returned to the state it was in prior to the vandalism, which was approved by several administrators. I suspect that this topic will be the subject of similar attacks in the future, would it be useful as a precaution to put a temporary block on that IP address? Thanks so much, Hhtttt (talk) 17:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an Admin, but I know that blocks are only placed on IP addresses for persistent vandalism, and never permanently. I doubt anyone would consider a pre-emptive block because of a single act of vandalism. But good on you for reverting the vandalism. —Wrathchild (talk) 18:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much, I really appreciate it- Hhtttt (talk) 19:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

But if vandalism continues, the article can be protected. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, yes, of course. —Wrathchild (talk) 11:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. As of today: The subject of the article has requested that personal information such as genealogy be omitted, because of an outstanding court case regarding a violent stalker, internet impersonator, and copyright violator. There is a fear that public records will be used to locate and potentially harm her or her family. In the interest of physical safety, all other names, aliases, and birth dates besides "Naomi Elizabeth" should be removed until after the trial. Hopefully this is possible. Hhtttt (talk) 16:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

This sort of stuff really should start at Talk:Naomi Elizabeth. —Wrathchild (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of unusual personal names

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of unusual personal names. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual personal names (5th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2009 (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, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes 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. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

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) 18:57, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hello Al E., I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, then don't use rollback and instead, use a manual edit summary. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 08:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Dunning-Kruger Edit

Hi there,

I recently added what I thought was an appropriate addition to the Dunning-Kruger Effect page, but you have removed it. I was just wondering if you could tell me why; in what ways was it inappropriate?

Thanks, A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashahmur (talk • contribs) 18:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

(Ashahmur (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC))

It was inappropriate because there's no connection from a third-party source; it's original research. Anyway, I posted about it at Talk:Dunning–Kruger effect, which is a better place to discuss it. —Al E.(talk) 18:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I am a newbie and wasn't aware of the OR rule. To clarify, the connection that I made would have to be written about in a peer-reviewed journal/newspaper etc. before it was admissable? Ashahmur (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily peer-reviewed, but a reliable source of some sort. For instance, if they'd done an interview or if someone had done a news piece on their research. —Al E.(talk) 19:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Edits/Changes that "May" constitue Vandalism

Dear Sir or Ma'am:

I have received a Laundry-list of edits that Wikipedia thinks I've done without using proper procedures, or with possible malicious intent. I HAVE done two(2) edits personally, but they were only spelling corrections. This is, however, a military computer. That means that MANY folks have access to it (and, it shows as the same user/IP address ALL the time). My first edit was to a spelling error in the Castle-page, and my next (and only OTHER) edit was to a military air craft site, where I corrected a spelling error as well. I PERSONALLY would never be malicious or even just stupid in any web setting. YOU, however, have no way of seeing that from ME because every edit on this computer looks like it is the same person doing it. I will apologize for the ignorance of the ones who have caused the trouble. As for MYSELF, I will be getting an account on my PERSONAL laptop, and will follow the Rules for future edits (I have only EVER corrected spelling errors to date). Thanks for your diligence in keeping this as open a format as possible, and giving us "a chance to enhance!" :)

Very Respectfully

James — Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.27.58.1 (talk) 22:01, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Deprod of Tommy Blake

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Tommy Blake, which you proposed for deletion. I am leaving this message here to notify you about it. All urls do not need to be working in an article per WP:DEADLINK, and I added a few more sources and fixed one of the deadlinks. The article might meet WP:GNG. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it. Instead, feel free to list the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bagumba (talk • contribs) 13:55, May 17, 2012‎

return message

how do i get the photographer to get permission to use his photo ? email / talk / its really hard to use — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celiaflyer (talk • contribs) 07:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I haven't the slightest idea to what you are referring. Can you provide some context please? —Al E.(talk) 12:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Good edit at Who Framed Roger Rabbit! As you said, he could well merit that adjective, but it's not our statement to make. -- McDoobAU93 17:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Uh...thanks? —Al E.(talk) 17:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

An RfC that you may be interested in...

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Archive 1

End-of-the-year meetups

Hello,

You're invited to the end-of-the-year meetup at Busboys and Poets on Sunday, December 14 at 6 PM. There is Wi-Fi, so bring your computer if you want!

You are also invited to our WikiSalon on Thursday, December 18 at 7 PM.

Hope to see you at our upcoming events!

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 02:22, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Museum hacks and museum edits

Hello there!

Upcoming events:

  • February 6–8: The third annual ArtBytes Hackathon at the Walters Art Museum! This year Wikimedia DC is partnering with the Walters for a hack-a-thon at the intersection of art and technology, and I would like to see Wikimedia well represented.
  • February 11: The monthly WikiSalon, same place as usual. RSVP on Meetup or just show up!
  • February 15: Wiki Loves Small Museums in Ocean City. Mary Mark Ockerbloom, with support from Wikimedia DC, will be leading a workshop at the Small Museum Association Conference on how they can contribute to Wikipedia. Tons of representatives from GLAM institutions will be present, and we are looking for volunteers. If you would like to help out, check out "Information for Volunteers".

I am also pleased to announce events for Wikimedia DC Black History Month with Howard University and NPR. Details on those events soon.

If you have any questions or have any requests, please email me at james.hare@wikimediadc.org.

See you there! – James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia DC celebrates Black History Month, and more!

Hello again!

Not even a week ago I sent out a message talking about upcoming events in DC. Guess what? There are more events coming up in February.

First, as a reminder, there is a WikiSalon on February 11 (RSVP here or just show up) and Wiki Loves Small Museums at the Small Museum Association Conference on February 15 (more information here).

Now, I am very pleased to announce:

There is going to be a lot going on, and I hope you can come to some of the events!

If you have any questions or need any special accommodations, please let me know.


Regards,

James Hare


(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 18:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Editing for Women's History in March

Hello,

I am very excited to announce this month’s events, focused on Women’s History Month:

  • Sunday, March 8: Women in the Arts 2015 Edit-a-thon – 10 AM to 4 PM
    Women in the Arts and ArtAndFeminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Free coffee and lunch served!
    More information • RSVP on Meetup
  • Wednesday, March 11: March WikiSalon – 7 PM to 9 PM
    An evening gathering with free-flowing conversation and free pizza.
    More information • RSVP on Meetup (or just show up!)
  • Friday, March 13: NIH Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon – 9 AM to 4 PM
    In honor of Women’s History Month, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is organizing and hosting an edit-a-thon to improve coverage of women in science in Wikipedia. Free coffee and lunch served!
    More information • RSVP on Meetup
  • Saturday, March 21: Women in STEM Edit-a-Thon at DCPL – 12 PM
    Celebrate Women's History Month by building, editing, and expanding articles about women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields during DC Public Library's first full-day edit-a-thon.
    More information • RSVP on Meetup
  • Friday, March 27: She Blinded Me with Science, Part III – 10 AM to 4 PM
    Smithsonian Institution Archives Groundbreaking Women in Science Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Free lunch courtesy of Wikimedia DC!
    More information • RSVP on Meetup
  • Saturday, March 28: March Dinner Meetup – 6 PM
    Dinner and drinks with your fellow Wikipedians!
    More information • RSVP on Meetup

Hope you can make it to an event! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.


Thanks,

James Hare

To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from this list. 02:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Upcoming attractions in DC

Hello!

Here are some upcoming DC meetups in April and May:

  • Tuesday, April 14: National Archives Hackathon on Wikipedia Space with American University – 2:30-5pm
    See the latest work on the Wikipedia Space exhibit in the new NARA Innovation Hub and brainstorm on new ideas for a public exhibit about Wikipedia
  • Friday, April 17: Women in Tech Edit-a-thon with Tech LadyMafia – 5-9pm
    Team up with Tech LadyMafia to improve Wikipedia content on women in the history of technology.
  • Saturday, April 25: April Dinner Meetup – 6 PM
    Dinner and drinks with your fellow Wikipedians!
  • Friday, May 1: International Labour Day Edit-a-Thon – 1:30 PM to 4:30 PM
    An edit-a-thon at the University of Maryland

Hope to see you at these events! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.


Cheers,

James Hare

To remove yourself from this mailing list, remove your name from this list. 22:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

February events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

February is shaping up to be a record-breaking month for us, with nine scheduled edit-a-thons and several other events:

We hope to see you at one—or all—of these events!

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

March events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

Looking for something to do in DC in March? We have a series of great events planned for the month:

Can't make it to an event? Most of our edit-a-thons allow virtual participation; see the guide for more details.

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Al E.. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Al_E./Archive_1&oldid=1144751595"