Jump to content

User talk:Dusti/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Speedy deletion declined: Jo Case

Hello Dusti. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jo Case, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The two references (rather than the notes which aren't indepedent), are enough for A7; substantial reviews ofher book. Whether that's enough for her to get past the GNG is a decision for AfD. . Thank you. GedUK  12:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks like the article was updated a bit after tagging. Thanks, I'll check it out more thoroughly. Dusti*Let's talk!* 18:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miriam Mehadipur

Hi Dusti, please look at my comments and links therein. Bearian (talk) 17:16, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

IRC poop

poop post to trigger IRC wm-bot Technical 13 (talk) 02:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Travis Brandsology

Hello Dusti. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Travis Brandsology to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question - "not notable" "OR" etc are not valid speedy reasons, and it is not promotional enough for G11. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice :) Dusti*Let's talk!* 21:16, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

WorldTraveller101

Hi, I assume you now know that i am just repeating what i have read? And that WorldTraveller101 was fibbing saying they where false, and i made them up. I don't want to be dragged into a situation where i am accused of making this stuff up. Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 13:58, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I went and checked the logs. The best thing for him right now is myself and his adoption - though if others keep trying to poke him and not assuming good faith I can easily see where he could get frustrated. Perhaps the best thing is to keep with constructive criticism for now. Dusti*Let's talk!* 14:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
I honestly think he needs more time off here. I just don't think he is ready. The one thing that's annoying me is that he not listening. For example i have told him time and again about marking eidts as vandalism. And when be basically called me a liar that's annoyed me (i think i deserve an apology). Im not out to get him, but at the moment he just takes up time of other editors. Overall this will lower the quality of wikipedia. The logs show he hasn't learnt his lesson. I don't have anything more to add to his talk so won't go back. I do respect you for "Taking him under your wing" --JetBlast (talk) 14:07, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
I think he needs less people wagging their fingers at him and harping on what happened before - and more people actually attempting to be constructive with him. Continuously badgering over what happened in the past rather than focusing on what's happening now causes discouragement and that's where we lose people. I greatly disagree with your comment above, and all I can say is that you're wrong. That's my opinion though. Dusti*Let's talk!* 14:13, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
I would usually agree, but the same thing happens again and again. Im up for giving him another chance but i think he needs more time to cool off. Thanks for the chat (and being civil) :-) --JetBlast (talk) 14:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Tabarez again

Hi! Maybe you'll be interested to take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Tabarez_.3D_Reza.Piri, and at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tabarez, because you opened the previous sockpuppet report about this guy... Thanks in advance! Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 23:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sweethearts (music group)

Hello Dusti, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sweethearts (music group), 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. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

The new face of DRN: Dusti

Recently the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard underwent some changes in how it operates. Part of the change involved a new list of volunteers with a bit of information about the people behind the names.

You are listed as a volunteer at DRN currently, to update your profile is simple, just click here. Thanks, Cabe6403(Talk•Sign) 17:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

Acc

Hi, I may be wrong. But I don't see how it appeared to you as a company name? #104915. I saw the mail, and got there. Thanks. -- ɑηsuмaη « ৳ᶏ ɭϞ » 08:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

There were a few Google hits that referred to them hiring, I see some hits for a name as well. I'll do some digging and see if I can find those hits. Dusti*Let's talk!* 15:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

carlton banks

What was wrong with saying he's "cocky" in replacement of the phrase "annoying" that was on the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.130.62 (talk) 04:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Acutally, the entire piece is inappropriate and I've removed that sentence. It's a personal opinion and not factually accurate. Dusti*Let's talk!* 05:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

For reverting a particularly nasty piece of vandalism on my user page.--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 05:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

It was pretty nasty, eh? No problem :) Dusti*Let's talk!* 05:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


I'm not vandalizing The Anomalies of Artificial Origin article at all. The girl above just now realized she made a mistake so can you please stop leaving me warning that I am doing this 0__o all I did was move a section over and fix some sentences spelling.

Kotava

Thank you for correcting my error(s). I have no experience at all with nominating articles for deletion on WP:EN, so your help is much appreciated! Best, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 11:41, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

STiki emergency

I'm sorry, you must be mistaken

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I did not withdraw the nomination from Mokenge P. Malafa. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

It was closed per this policy - specifically #1 - your nomination wasn't deletion based. You were asking a question, of which AFD isn't the appropriate venue. Dusti*Let's talk!* 19:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The nomination was fine. Thanks for your understanding. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The nomination actually wasn't - see the comments on the nomination itself. If you wish to renominate - you can - but please cite a valid deletion reason. Dusti*Let's talk!* 19:05, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
OK, so you don't understand. I'll repeat: The nomination was fine. You shouldn't have closed it. I expect you to rectify this mistake. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
My understanding is fine - it appears you may need assistance with the deletion policy. Please check out WP:BEFORE, WP:AFDHOWTO, and WP:SK criterion number one, which I'll post here for your reference:

The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance an argument for deletion—perhaps only proposing a non-deletion action such as moving or merging, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted.

If you have any questions, I'm more than happy to answer them for you. Dusti*Let's talk!* 19:13, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I do not have any questions, but I do have information for you. Your understanding is way off the scale. An argument was provided for deletion. Thank you for your understanding of this matter. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
You did provide a rationale for deletion however it was not phrased in the usual way and was posted like a question. Looking at the article, I do not feel it meeting the deletion criteria really. The closed by Dusti was fine as the discussion is better suited for the notability Noticeboard. Therefore there is nothing here than needs to be rectified. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Barney the barney barney: If you would like to discuss the notability of the subject, but don't believe the article should be deleted, please begin a discussion at WP:N/N. If you intended your deletion reason to be interpreted as "This does not meet WP:PROF and should be deleted", the discussion can be reopened. In the future, try to make sure your deletion reasons are more clearly-worded. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I concur with the statements made by Dusti and GorillaWarfare, your deletion rationale was not a valid one (and there was no consensus for anything on the AFD) and if you want to discuss the notability, WP:N/N is the venue. Take it there, please. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 21:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

brianotridge

Sorry, not a frequent editor, made an error. Comment inserted on talk page. Please delete entry in error on main page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianotridge (talk • contribs) 07:37, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Eh?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Three deletes, including people who deal in the subject area, no keeps and an article that obviously lacks sources ... and you relist the Afd? I think we have been here before, haven't we? The article creator has also been referred to at ANI during the last day or so in a none too appreciative manner. - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Relisting the article does nothing other than allow more conversation on the article. There's a weak delete, a delete, and a comment. I see no issue in a relist. Keep in mind that should an admin come along they're more than welcome, if they feel there's consensus, to delete the article. A relisted discussion doesn't have to run another seven days. Dusti*Let's talk!* 00:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
No, you misunderstand. There are two outright deletes, one weak delete that clearly admits no sources available and a comment that is clearly trending to delete. You have completely misjudged this and it is not the first time that you and I have had this problem. Yes, it merely delays the inevitable for a week (want a bet on it?) but this non-admin tinkering is not helpful. As a relisted discussion, it is highly unlikely that a passing admin would bother looking at it until that time is up - well, unless I raise your poor actions at ANI. If you can't read consensus then keep your nose out of it, please. - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
All that Dusti is attempting is to try to get more input from the community to determine whether or not the article should be infact deleted. Who says that you are delaying the "inevitable"? By relisting more input will be put into determining what to do with the article. It may seem like an inconvienece but it is done to ensure that all articles fairly get looked at and a proper decision can be reached. Peter.C • talk • contribs 01:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Basicaly what Peter said is exactly what Dusti was doing. Relisting to get further community input therefore allowing a more a accurate decision to Come forth. John F. Lewis (talk) 01:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
I am aware of what they are doing. My query relates to the utility of it in this particular circumstance. As I intimated, Dusti has done something similar before at an AfD in which I participated and so I am also aware that their judgement might be questionable. Where do we draw the line? How many more comments are required to avoid another relisting in a week's time? You are not going to get a more accurate decision in this instance and there is no end to the degree of accuracy that someone might request: next week there might be a few further "delete" comments but someone such as Dusti could still relist in a desire to see more accuracy. Why even get involved in this controversial non-admin process when "because I can" is so obviously at odds with "because I should"? Unless there is obviously a situation where either no-one has commented or there are policy-compliant comments both for and against, Dusti should keep away from relisting and let an admin deal with it. - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
In either instance Sitush - I did nothing wrong. You cannot say that I've done something "questionable" as there's no questionable behavior. Read the guidelines at RELIST. Other individuals have come and stated that they agree with what I did. I apologize if you think that I've "delayed" any action - as that's obviously not the case. I am now done with this conversation. Thank you. Dusti*Let's talk!* 16:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Closing AFDs far too early without consensus being reached or for invalid reasons is a bad idea, and you seem to be making a habit of it. This suggests a basic level of WP:COMPETENCE is not being met. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Barney - the same goes for you. Three individuals told you above your deletion rationale was invalid - one of them was an admin. Perhaps it's your competence that needs to be questioned as you were also just warned about placing a PROD tag on an AFC listing. I am done with this conversation. Dusti*Let's talk!* 16:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
No. WP:IWONTLISTEN isn't an option. Please stop trying to argue with the facts as they are being presented to you. Your understanding of this is appreciated. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Dusti, it was questionable and I asked the question - QED. I don't dispute that other rather inexperienced people agreed with your action but I'll wager you would not do so well if I raised it at ANI or similar. The article has now been deleted by an admin who has a lot of AfD experience. And, no, I didn't ask them to look at it. I'm not going to trawl through your numerous other actions at AfD but I am keeping a note of this: if it happens again any time soon then I'll probably step it up a gear. I really do think that you need to consider my advice above that begins "unless there is obviously a situation ..." - Sitush (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me Sitush. Firstly, I don't appreciated being called inexperienced. I am experienced while not being here much longer than 1 year on Wikimedia as a whole. Also if you think this would not go well as ANI, I invite you to bring it up, in fact I ask you to bring it. The relist was not as all inappropriate. People have different and consider different thing as consensus because everything is interpreted differently. Also your idle threats are not wanted not constructive to Wikipedia. All in all, What you said above I really do not appreciate what you said above, making idles threats and being rude to two users who are in fact experienced. Now, leave the matter or take it further. John F. Lewis (talk) 21:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Experience tells me that taking it to ANI at this point would be a waste of everyone's time. That you seem not to realise this is a sign of something or another ... - Sitush (talk) 21:31, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
I know it would be a waste of people's time. But if you have a concern with a user's conduct, you need to follow it. The fact you think making idles threats and calling people inexperienced, helps solve issues you have with Dusti, shows to me you are inexperienced. John F. Lewis (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Speedy deletion contested: Royal mail Choir

Hello Dusti, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Royal mail Choir, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Is a plausible, useful redirect or is not a redirect at all. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 23:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Symmetry (Band) CSD declined

Subjects notable. "Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 05:01, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hello Dusti, i read you message, thanks for guiding me. Well i just want to redrict VJ Feroze to Feroze Malik, thats why i created two articles with same things, i don't know how to redrict..:) Vaani Singh (talk) 09:45, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done :) In the future, if you want to do a redirect, you do it by placing #REDIRECT [[Article name]] Dusti*Let's talk!* 09:48, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Kotava

Hi,

The redirection of the Kotava article done ​​by User:Kwamikagami is a disguised deletion. Since 2005, this article is systematically canceled, mainly because of the opposition of User:IJzeren_Jan who acts as the "guardian of the temple" in the field of constructed languages​​. The third notice of removal is poor and once again very fallacious.

I noticed some comments here, but owing to the "drowning" of the article, very few people will see them.

Wikimistusik (talk) 11:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

See my comment on Talk:Kotava#Once again shooting and killing, better keep the discussion in one place. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 16:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mokenge P. Malafa (2nd nomination)

I did what Barney should have done; perhaps you may want to revisit to discuss the actual article. DGG ( talk ) 16:45, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 31 August 2013 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

Speedy deletion declined: Ashley Moffett

Hello Dusti. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ashley Moffett, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: fellow of Kings and professor at Cambridge is certainly enough to pass the low bar of A7. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

The Signpost: 11 September 2013

Hey man what's going on

You've been gone for a while, just taking a short Wikibreak I hope. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey there Mezzo! I'm actually in the middle of immigrating to Canada - some of our paperwork went through and it's been a hectic month so far :) Thanks for the poke and concern :) I'll be a little more active for a burst, and then may get inactive for a few days again :) Dusti*Let's talk!* 23:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013

Your involvement with DRN

Hi there, I noticed that you haven't been as active at DRN as you was before. DRN has been a bit backlogged lately and we could use some extra hands. We have updated our volunteer list to a new format, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteers (your name is still there under the old format if you haven't updated it) and are looking into ways to make DRN more effective and more rewarding for volunteers (your input is appreciated!). If you don't have much time to volunteer at the moment, that's fine too, just move your name to the inactive list (you're free to add yourself back to active at any time). Hope to see you again soon :) Steven Zhang (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2013

October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 October 2013

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

Request for comment at Talk:TheBus (Honolulu)

I have opened a request for comment at Talk:TheBus (Honolulu) regarding the vehicle lists in the fleet section. As you have recently edited TheBus (Honolulu), I would like to invite you to add to the discussion. Musashi1600 (talk) 11:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello, Dusti:

WikiProject AFC is holding a two month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from December 1st, 2013 – January 31st, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. EdwardsBot (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) at 09:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Please comment on changes to the AfC mailing list

Hello Dusti! There is a discussion that your input is requested on! I look forward to your comments, thoughts, opinions, criticisms, and questions!

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.

This message was composed and sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

Hi Dusti. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:20, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

Notification of a June AfC BackLog Drive

Hello Dusti:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sent on behalf of (t) Josve05a (c) by {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) using the MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

The Signpost: 04 June 2014

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

Speedy deletion declined: Kenneth Andrew Walsh

Hello Dusti. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kenneth Andrew Walsh, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Chair of department at a major university and 200 published papers is certainly enough to pass the low bar of A7. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 22:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Thelsford Priory

Hello Dusti. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Thelsford Priory, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See reference, List of monastic houses in Warwickshire. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

This move request

Sierra Vista Police Department (Arizona) is a request to move a red link to an article. Surely something is wrong.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

It was actually a messy move, my apologies. I made a typo when moving it to his/her userspace. Instead of typing User:Justinjd2020/Sierra Vista Police Department (Arizona), I typed User:Justinjd2020:Sierra Vista Police Department (Arizona). It just needs deleted, the move has already happened. My apologies :) Dusti*Let's talk!* 16:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I deleted it.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dusti/Archive_7&oldid=1168300840"