Jump to content

User talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2009

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


Moxon

Replied at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation. PamD (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of terms incorporating Hungarian

I have nominated List of terms incorporating Hungarian, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms incorporating Hungarian. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you

The article you created: List of terms incorporating Hungarian may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

The faster you respond on this page, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of your article is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted {{Findsources3}}:

Find sources for List of terms incorporating Hungarian: google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:

1. List the page on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
2. At any time, you can ask any administrator to move your article to a special page. (Called userfication)
3. You can request a mentor to help you: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
4. When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. These acronyms don't need to intimidate you. Here is a list of acronyms you can use yourself: Deletion debate acronyms, which will help you argue that the article should be kept.


If your page is deleted, you also have many options available. Good luck! Ikip (talk) 20:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Gresham's will from Gresham College

Hi John, I see that in 2007 that you added Last Will of Sir Thomas Gresham to Gresham College. It is marked as something that could/should be moved to WikiSource. We are happy to received the text for the will, though would prefer to get the complete text and full source data rather than to just scoop it from WP. Would you have the full text? -- billinghurst (talk) 01:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure where I got it - but sourses are listed in http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=disposition%20of%20me%20Sir%20Thomas%20Gresham%20&meta=

I hope this helps :::Johnbibby (talk)

User:Richardshusr/Greek administration of Smyrna (1919-1922)

You tagged this page as "needs more information. Presumably you feel it needs more information before it can be transwikied to Wikisource. I have moved the source information out of the footnotes and to the top of the page. Please let me know if you think additional information is needed. --Richard (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

RFA

Hello, I'm not clear on what admin related tools you propose to use. Blocking? Deleting? Protecting? Cheers, Dlohcierekim 13:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

A little deleting, for example after having Commons'd an image, or articles that have been put up for Transwiki, some moving if needed. I believe that I was asked to accept a nomination at WP due to my all-round skills, and my generally positive attitude exhibited at WS, and simply to do the work required in cleaning and polishing. If there are tasks that need doing, I don't mind helping. -- billinghurst (talk) 15:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Richardshusr/Greek administration of Smyrna (1919-1922)

I have deketed User:Richardshusr/Greek administration of Smyrna (1919-1922) as a possible copyright violation. Work was published in 1926; author died in 1942. Besides, I don't need that text any more. --Richard (talk) 03:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Annapolis Joint Declaration

Can't find the Afd page for Annapolis Joint Declaration. There is a copy on wikisource, no obstacle by me to delete (not even speedily). Dedalus (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

your RfA

A consensus has been reached by your peers that you should be an admin. I have made it so. Please review Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and keep up the great work. Sincerely, Kingturtle (talk) 14:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! - Dank (push to talk) 14:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the confidence, and the support. I will keep up the great support work. :-)

-- billinghurst (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations and Best wishes on your recent RFA -- Tinu Cherian - 16:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful RfA, hope this fits! ϢereSpielChequers 21:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Arnold

I don't believe Charles Thomas Arnold and Thomas Arnold are the same. Mddietz (talk) 20:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Happy to have that discussion, though would like to base it on presented evidence, rather than a single line statement. Probably a discussion for Talk:Thomas Arnold anyway. -- billinghurst (talk) 00:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

You deleted my photo inappropriately

Deletion log); 11:41 . . Billinghurst (talk | contribs) deleted "File:JerrySandersByPhilKonstantin.jpg" (F8: Media file available on Commons: F8: File available on Wikimedia Commons as File:Jerry Sanders.jpg)

I have reloaded the correct photo: "JerrySandersByPhilKonstantin.jpg." Do not delete it, or rename it.

If you wish to delete something, delete this file: "Jerry Sanders.jpg"

I took the photo, I named it.

Phil Konstantin Phil Konstantin (talk) 18:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Phil. The photo that you took has been moved to the Commons domain space to allow use of the image across the WikiMedia projects as per the information given at Wikipedia:Wikimedia Commons. Unless there is a specific reason to have the image housed on Wikipedia (and that more relates to fair use), then it should be on Commons and you can directly access the image by the normal means of adding a image/file link. This is a good thing and there are no negative connotations, it is process driven and not relating to anything beyond that. If you have a unified login, you are just as able to manage the file, and some would say more able to add information about the image. -- billinghurst (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 

   Have you further comment or some level of response?


Keep: JerrySandersByPhilKonstantin.jpg --------- Delete: JerrySanders.jpg ---------- I have never had any objections to moving the photo to Commons. You just deleted the wrong one. Phil Konstantin (talk) 11:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin

That image is now at Commons with that name, and that is all that is required. The image is not on WP, and that is the purpose of the exercise. This was never about lessening choice, and more about moving the file to Commons. -- billinghurst (talk) 21:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


The image JerrySandersByPhilKonstantin.jpg IS on WP for San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders: ------ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Sanders_(politician) Phil Konstantin (talk) 22:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Phil

You are correct that it is shows on WP, however, it is not housed on WP. If you look at File:JerrySandersByPhilKonstantin.jpg you will see that it is housed on Commons. Which has been the purpose of the whole exercise. House on Commons, display on all projects. :-) -- billinghurst (talk) 22:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Iowa State University's campus & buildings

Though I agree some clean-up is needed in this article, your changes are inconsistent, leaving links that could be removed and deleting useful links. There are numerous locations where you deleted a link, but in the next line you left a link that was just as "disambiguate" or "cluttering" as the link you removed. Some examples include when listing the departments in Logomarcino hall, you took out the link for psychology and left the link for education (actually two links for education where left in the same paragraph); or when talking about State Gym, you took out the link to the current coliseum which replaced State Gym and left a link to a former stadium that was only mentioned in passing. Removing links "hit and miss" like that does not uncluttered an article, it just makes it difficult for the reader to follow. Unless you can convince me that being inconsistent is in accordance with wiki policy, I'm going to revert your edit. You had numerous positive changes, but the mistakes far out way the good.--Jaretac (talk) 15:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I am disambiguating Conference, and tried to do a bit of a cleanup on the way past. If you feel that you need to revert the article, then that is fine, though please disambiguate conference as you go. Alternatively you can continue the clean up of the article to make it better. -- billinghurst (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed that it is mostly your contributions. I would suggest that you have a reasonable piece of {{cleanup}} to do on the article. I would think that the linking of specific university departments to generic terms is misleading, especially where the links do not add value to the article. Also, please consider WP:OVERLINK as it is a field of blue. -- billinghurst (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I completely reformatted the article about a month ago to a table format, that is why my name shows up as much as it does. I haven't done much with the text of the page and as I already admitted, there is much that needs to be done there. I have nothing against what you are trying to accomplish, it just was so hit and miss and there didn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to your choice in removing links. If there was a specific reason, please let me know. I'll make sure I keep your changes with the conference..--Jaretac (talk)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 07:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

SOD/CAT

This article which you speedied earlier was restored in altered form, and I have declined to delete it. I'm helping another editor work on it. DGG (talk) 03:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, should at least ensure that it is encyclopedic. -- billinghurst (talk) 10:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. Notability

Hi,
Could you please explain why Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. would not meet notability guidelines? As referenced and cited in the article, the firm was involved in major securities class action cases, including the multi-billion dollar Tyco settlement. Does wikipedia not consider this to be notable?
Thanks, Steph0513 (talk) 13:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Go and read the pages, then have a look at {{COI}}, and then try again. I could have deleted the page outright, and think that the pointers would be useful. Remember that WP is an encyclopaedia, neither Advertiser's monthly, nor a company glossy. -- billinghurst (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I know that wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Grant & Eisenhofer has been alluded to on other wikipedia pages (i.e. Global Crossing, Royal Dutch Shell, and Tyco). I created the Grant & Eisenhofer page and then added links from the companies listed above. If these companies mentioned the class actions that Grant & Eisenhofer was part of, why would the firm not be considered notable? The page is not an advertisement. It mainly gives history and information on the law firm. It doesn't even describe the firm's practice areas. Also, every assertion made is cited to a reliable secondary source. Steph0513 (talk) 13:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I needed that moment of comedy relief, however, surely I don't look that gullible. I am not sure which encyclopaedias you have been reading, however, it is not one that I have read, and there have been a few over the years.
Fast forward one hundred years, and think what information you would like to read about a company. The current article is fluff and unencyclopaedic. Two options, fix it, or we can delete it. <shrug>-- billinghurst (talk) 13:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't insult my intelligence. It's unethical, unnecessary, and rude. You have no idea who I am, how well-educated I am, and you certainly do not know what encyclopedias I have read. You should consider the various audiences wikipedia attracts. I do not know you so I will not make assumptions regarding your wikipedia use. However, as part of the legal community, I can assure you that in one hundred years I'll want to know about the law firm who got $3.2 billion out of Tyco as well as hundreds of millions of dollars out of other notable companies. Steph0513 (talk) 14:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I did not insult your intelligence. I may have been considered sarcastic, maybe flippant, it was definitely trying to subtly get you to reconsider your position. By the way, I am not sure where it could be considered unethical.
Let us step through this process.
  • The article has been nominated and deleted twice in July 2009 and the third rendition now nominated for deletion in August 2009
  • The articles have been nominated for deletion by various users, who all share a common opinion
  • It would not be incredible to say that there is very possibly WP:SUL or a cohort of people working to put the article forward. I can request a CheckUser of the editing accounts if you like.
  • You do not address the issue of Conflict of Interest as per {{COI}}
  • You do not address the concerns that are legitimately raised with you about the context and content of the article. You hold your position and just argue.
Now where were we about unethical, unnecessary and rude? You argue the toss with me, or listen to concerns and try and rescue the article. Looking at the existing history for the article, I would say that maintaining your existing position is not going to get community support. I now step away from the article, and leave you to it. -- billinghurst (talk) 14:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The article has been completely re-written, therefore I do believe that I have listened to the concerns raised regarding the content. Since the speedy deletion tag has been removed, I see no need to further this conversation, but thanks so much for all of your insights. Steph0513 (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


Vachette article

Hi. I think you or NawlinWiki were one of the first to mark my first Wiki article about Vachette Path for deletion. I have made some changes like toned down the language and added other sources/references. I'd appreciate it if you'd check and let me know what you think. If it should still be deleted, what are some tips about notability? Thanks. --Toledodocstudent (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Educate Lanka

Any chance you could explain to me why you think Educate Lanka is not a copyvio? Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Jordan Woolley

Hi there. I think deleting this article as A7 was incorrect. An actor who has played roles in multiple notable TV productions and has Google News hits should never ever be considered lacking any indication of importance and significance. I'd request you restore the article and allow it to be cleaned up. Regards SoWhy 12:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- billinghurst (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. If I may, I would like to advice you to be a bit more careful when handling speedy deletions. On a side note, I wrote an essay at WP:A7M which you might find useful when dealing with A7 requests, it lists things that have been often accepted by admins as indications for importance/significance. Regards SoWhy 12:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Mary Toft

Hi there, thanks for the kind message, sorry but I only just noticed it :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Welshy

Hello. I've started a discussion about this page's clean-up and started discussions on the Talk pages of other tagged dabs. I thought I'd let you know and see if there's anything you wanted to add. Thanks and keep up the good work! Boleyn2 (talk) 21:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I marked it in passing doing another disambig. -- billinghurst (talk) 07:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Sidney Colvin

Are you still interested in Sidney Colvin? I knew nothing about him and his family a couple of dasys ago, but have since done some digging, summarised at Talk:Colvin (surname). BrainyBabe (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. My interest is not specific for Colvin, and more for collating information on authors at Wikisource, especially where they were contributors to the plethora of reference works from the end of the 19th, and beginning of the 20th centuries. -- billinghurst (talk) 09:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

at your leisure

 Done previously -- billinghurst (talk) 05:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

One of your actions is under discussion at WP:ANI

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:dreamshit blocked for username violation - review please for details. Regards SoWhy 11:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 31 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 15:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Interview

Hi, Billinghurst. I'm doing a study about Wikipedia (particularly about sysops) for my Masters in Communications and Media Studies at Monash Uni, and was wondering if you would be so kind as to take some time to talk to me. I'm contacting a few editors/sysops in hopes of hearing first-hand accounts of your day-to-day activities are and your relationship with other members of the community. If you're in Melbourne and can spare some time for a friendly talk (no more than 30 minutes), I'd greatly appreciate it :)

Please let me know if you're interested. Cheers, --In continente (talk) 06:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Outskirts rural, though do have days planned in the big smoke for late Sep and early Oct. Note that I am a fringe WP, and most of my stuff is where it interwikis, esp. with WS and Commons, and there needs to be admin to tidy those components. So if you are after a megaWPian, I am not that person. -- billinghurst (talk) 07:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for your reply :) I'm not actually looking for "mega-wikipedians" per-se, but rather, editors and sysops who participate in community discussions and deliberations and who have taken a special interest in the project. It's more about a sense of involvement than actual edit counts.
Your input would indeed be very helpful. If you let me know when you'll be in Melbourne, we could perhaps do it over a cup of coffee. Thanks again! --In continente (talk) 11:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Coffee? I love it when people speak dirty. I'll email. -- billinghurst (talk) 11:12, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
haha, Thanks! I'll watch for your email, then. --In continente (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Franciszek Chalupka

delink unexceptional dates

Why? Direct me to the sources on Wiki about "unexceptional dates"--WlaKom (talk) 23:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

You linked the years, I unlinked them and added a link to the relevant guidance that I used for my actions. Isn't it appropriate that when a formatting change is made in line with guidance material that I provide a link to that material? It is common practice, and one that I will continue to undertake unless you can demonstrate to me that it is unhelpful. -- billinghurst (talk) 03:01, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

Cannot login.

Hello. im active wikipedian from Polish Wiki and several times was editing EnWiki. Wanted to work more here but i dont want to work as IP. Problem is, that i cannot login. My nickname on PLWiki and most of others projects and languages is - Blueye [1]. I try even to create nev account, also with completly diffrent nickname but it simply not work. I choose u randomly, i hope u dont mind. I hope u can help me or pass this problem to correct person. Regards --213.161.245.218 (talk) 08:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

A quick look here shows that the account is not unified for enWP. So from PL merge account you need to go through the processes, or help to get the align the account with your login. If that still fails, then please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. -- billinghurst (talk) 09:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

User:Charles Dawson

Needs some guidance. He is again blocked for disrupting the article John Henry Cox. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

Camvilles

Thanks for catching me nodding at Thomas de Camville, and also for finishing off that page of DNB. Jan1naD (talk • contrib) 21:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Just plodding along behind. :-) billinghurst (talk) 10:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

Award

Wikipedia Administrator's Award
It is with pleasure, that I honour you with the 'Wikipedia Administrator Award'; for helping me complete texts thoroughly and for also helping me with my Wikisource editing. Angelprincess72 (talk) 18:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Wikipedia:Contents_box

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wikipedia:Contents_box , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. – imis☂ 01:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2009&oldid=1166515352"