User talk:Rdsmith4/Archive 10

Thanks

Thanks for changing my username from CyberThing to DalekChicken. DalekChicken (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

User: Willy on Wheels

I know that this is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay late to ask the question, but why was Willy on Wheels blocked? Was it vandalism? Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I see. Then why is it that the original only made three edits on votes for deletion? Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Hold templates

Hi Rdsmith4, I wanted to ask something regarding templates at RfA. When you closed Elonka's third request for adminship, you used the "on hold" templates while reading it. Out of curiosity, what are these templates called? I know what the ones for successful/unsuccessful RfAs are, but not hold. I know I don't need to use them, but I would like to know what they're called just for my own reference. Thanks. Acalamari 18:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply and answer to my question: it was appreciated. Acalamari 18:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Please wipe away my Account (with diskussion and history)

Hello Rdsmith4,

please clean up (delete) my Account (user-page with discussion and history) in the english Wikipedia! Thank you very much!Nup (talk) 16:37, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Administrator renames

I'm not thinking of renaming my account any time soon, or in the forseeable future, but what is the policy on renaming administrators? Would I (potentially) have to re-register the old account name at some point, for example? Rudget (Help?) 18:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That's basically what I thought. Thank you. Regards, Rudget (Help?) 18:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation completed

You’ve renamed my account User:ChroniclerSPb to User:Chronicler after usurpation request. Please, rename also my old userpage User:ChroniclerSPb (and its talkpage) to User:Chronicler (it’s impossible for not admin). Thanks. --Chronicler (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for having renamed my account so quickly. Gede (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to thank you too! it was a nice surprise, after the 1st reply I got, I gave up.. Thanks! Leia (talk) 18:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Account Nup

Please rename my User-Account Nup in "Former User 23". The best would be, that there is no more visible on the user's page the discussios and the history. In the german wikipedia it was possible to do that (administrator, buerocrat) Thank you vey much in advice! And then please delete these contributions here, thank you! 92.75.229.136 (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

usurpation request

Hi,

About this request, what is the "guest" bug ? I would add that as I haven't many contributions on :en with the username malta_fr, I don't mind if it isn't merged with malta. What matter to me is to be able to log in with the username Malta. bye, Malta fr (talk) 12:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Your philosophical musings at WP:BN

I found your most recent comment at WP:BN quite interesting, for two reasons:

1. Because part of what you’re saying echoes one of my favorite quotes:

   "When it looks like somebody is saying something utterly stupid or insane, try to figure out why, from their point of view, it might seem reasonable to say such a thing." - Nick Mathewson, here. See also Principle of charity. I originally stumbled on this at ArmedBlowfish's now-deleted talk page.

2. Because the other part of what you’re saying matches very closely with a similar theory of mine: Everyone has a reptilian brain (which produces instinctive reactions), and a primate brain (which thinks rationally). Some people think that humans use their primate brain to decide what to do. When I’m having a good day, I tend to believe people use their primate brain to overcome, as best they can, their normal desire to do what their reptilian brain tells them to do. When I’m having a bad day, I tend to think people use their primate brain primarily to come up with rational-sounding justifications for doing what their reptilian brain tells them to do. We’re all reptiles, it’s just humans have evolved a way to make it look like we aren’t.

When I first contributed to that thread, to be honest I kind of thought I was at WT:RFA. It's gotten pretty esoteric for WP:BN... --barneca (talk) 19:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Username change to capital A

Thanks Dan - that's worked a treat! πιππίνυ δ - (dica) 22:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

AN & AN/I

Sure - no problem. It's just been a frustrating evening - "hey that guy, he's guilty of...something..not sure what..not going to present any diffs but he's surely guilty!" --Killerofcruft (talk) 01:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I've said all I need to say at this point. The editor knows that he'll be watched closely. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

That thread was well handled by you. Nice work. Viridae^Talk 02:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Change proposal

Since comments are going to get lost on that large thread about AN and AN/I, I thought I might copy mine here to make sure you saw it (since, unlike many others, I agree!). Here it is: As someone who has recently been described as using AN and AN/I as a "home away from home" I think getting rid of both of them is a fine idea. The purpose of AN is mostly as a community noticeboard, for which we already have WP:CN. There is no need for it to be unduly focused on administrators - admins aren't a separate class, and no issues concern admins exclusively. The other subpages of AN could just as easily be subpages of some other place, and they all serve a specific function that serves to weed out general or unfocused complaints. I'd suggest, though, that AN and AN/I not be redirected to whatever the replacement is - instead, leave it as a map of the various noticeboards so that CN et al don't become new dumping grounds for the same old crap.

The only other thing I'd add to that is this: You're a crat, so judging consensus is supposed to be your thing. I'd say that in this situation you might consider going with a "rough consensus" because, like all things AN or AN/I, it will be discussed forever and a clear consensus is unlikely to ever be apparent. On the other hand, the utility of reorganizing the pages like that seems obvious to me (and I should know...). Objectors will probably come to the same realization in time. Avruch 00:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Small bureaucratic request

Hi Rdsmith4, I noticed that when you granted Bjweeks adminship, you changed his rights from "rollbacker" to "rollbacker, sysop". If it's all right with you, when you promote someone to adminship, can you please make sure that rights made redundant by sysop (i.e. rollback, account-creator, and ip-block-exempt) are de-checked when you're in Special:Userrights? Having the promoting bureaucrat remove the rights while promoting an editor to adminship saves other admins from removing the right themselves, and also prevents the userrights log from being clogged up with unnecessary rights changes. It's up to you, of course, but it would be appreciated if you did this. Thank you. Acalamari 19:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

In all fairness, I personally don't have any problem with keeping a user with "rollbacker, sysop" groups combined, and there isn't any harm in keeping them together. However, there do seem to be a lot of users who believe it's more organized and less cluttery (is that a word?) to keep sysops and rollbackers separate, and that users with the former right grouped with the latter make it harder to keep track of everyone who has rollback. In addition, some admins also remove the rollback right from admins who are in that group, therefore filling the userrights log with useless entries. I hope this explanation is satisfactory. Acalamari 19:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thank you for your consideration. Acalamari 20:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Cross-wiki spam

Heads up - can you do some cross-wiki deletions? Raul654 (talk) 02:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrat hunting

Hi Rdsmith4, I just noticed that you've come online. Well, I've been searching for a bureaucrat for some time, and I was wondering, can you, since you're active, close Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Headbomb and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/oren0 please? They're both a few hours overdue. Thanks. Acalamari 02:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for closing them, and thanks also for the quick response! :) Acalamari 02:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for fulfilling my username change request! Rasadam (talk) 21:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Scouts

Hi again. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scouting and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scouting/Members, from a fellow Scout and Crat. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN

I just read a thread you started (concerning a solution to page size) which is now archived.

I have a few suggestions which I've posted at WT:AN, and would be interested in your input/insight. - jc37 06:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ringo Star

I have nominated Ringo Star, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ringo Star. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? JavaTenor (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Holly_Ann_Collins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holly_Ann_Collins I think that you should get a user that is fluent in dutch should go over it. Some of the sources are in my native language Dutch. Thank you. --Americangrantedasylumnetherlands (talk) 21:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO

You have been not signed up as an active member of WP:CHICAGO, but you have participated in discussion at either Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3 or Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please sign up as an active member. Also, if you are a member, be advised that the project is now atrying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Why did you rename my username from Mlandauer to Usurped Username 3??

My login (Mlandauer) has gone. I never received a notification email or anything. Some explanation for your actions would be nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.64.109 (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ReneLacoste2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:ReneLacoste2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

EK

You forgot to notify EK directly about this closing. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyking 3

Thank you for closing this contentious RfA, thank you very much. If it's not too much too ask, can you please explain how you evaluated the all the comments and reached your decision? Thank you. Acalamari 20:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

That's a reasonable explanation, and I thank you for it. I wasn't challenging your decision, rather, since it was a major RFA, I was simply curious to know what your evaluation was. Thank you for providing your answer. Best wishes. Acalamari 19:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

SUL

Thank you so much! It's working perfectly! Dreadstar † 18:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:PeerNavbox

Template:PeerNavbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Bazj (talk) 14:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Query on Neutrality(?) policy

As I can recall wikipedias policy is to refer to countries under their legal name as it is accepted by the UN. however if one looks at the todays 7/9/08 first page/on this day section on will propably see "independence day of Republic of Macedonia"... however there is no such state as this. THE OFFICIAL NAME IS: Former Yugoslavic Republic Of Macedonia F.Y.R.O.M. May I remind you also that the are currently negotiations taking place for the removal of continuation of the "Macedonia" bit in the name. Wikipedias neutrality policy dictates that the temporary official name should be used.... If so possible I propose the creation of a bot to undertake the job of fixing this isue. As unimportand as it might seam to you: 1)it is a breach of the wikipedias neutrality policy 2) it is malinforming and incorrect 3) it means a great deal for the current countries in the dispute 4) it is disrespectfull towards the citizens of those countries and the UN thank you very much for your attention 79.166.26.188 (talk) 03:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

This IP seems to have spammed all the crats on this. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Photo permission

Dan,

What does the Creative Commons license mean for usage. I work for a publishing company and I was looking for a photo of a Rolls Royce Spirit of Ecstasy hood ornament and found yours on Wiki. I don't understand the usage. Can I use this image?

Bruce Borich

Photo permission

Dan,

What does the Creative Commons license mean for usage. I work for a publishing company and I was looking for a photo of a Rolls Royce Spirit of Ecstasy hood ornament and found yours on Wiki. I don't understand the usage. Can I use this image?

Bruce Borich bborich@sov-soc.com

Photo permission

Dan,

What does the Creative Commons license mean for usage. I work for a publishing company and I was looking for a photo of a Rolls Royce Spirit of Ecstasy hood ornament and found yours on Wiki. I don't understand the usage. Can I use this image?

Bruce Borich bborich@sov-soc.com

Chicago Meetup

What is the latest?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Editorofthewiki

Closed by SNOW or by nom's request? Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 04:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems odd, since he repeatedly said he wanted it left open... though I agree it needed to be closed. But whatever, later! Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 04:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I second the question: closed by WP:SNOW or by nominator's request? If closed by snow I actually suggest you please reopen it and allow the editor to withdraw gracefully. Bwrs (talk) 04:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know, while I feel bad for EotW, your early closure of that RFA was the right thing to do.It was turning into a slugfest like few others, and if I had had time last night, I would have asked EotW if I could close it. I was going to ask him this morning, but you already had. I think it's good for bureaucrats to intervene and end the mudslinging in RFA's like that one was. I wish you (crats in general, not you personally) would be more proactive in striking crappy opposes rather than leaving us wondering if you are going to count them or no. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

I really appreciate this comment. That's exactly how I feel. I think the opposes due to that question are a bit silly, and like you said, my answer to that question shouldn't reflect who I am as an editor. I'm afraid though, that it's a bit to late though, I'm already at 74%. iMatthew (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3

I noticed that you're involved in the discussions about the next meetup in Chicago. I've been offering free copies of my book(let), Wikipedia Reader's Guide, to meetup groups, as a sort of give-away/souvenir that editors can give to friends (for example, to encourage them to try editing). If you'd like me to send you (or someone else) some copies, for the meetup, please let me know. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 14:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

RfC/U

There is currently an open Request for Comment on User Conduct here, regarding G2bambino. As someone with past interactions with him, you are invited to comment. — [ roux ] [x] 15:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Rdsmith4/Archive 10's Day!

User:Rdsmith4/Archive 10 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Rdsmith4/Archive 10's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Rdsmith4/Archive 10! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

why did you delete the page about volcanoes in ST.LUCIA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.26.92 (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Email sent

Hello. I've sent you an email. Seraphim♥Whipp 23:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Email sent_2

Sic. Wolfgang (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I nominated redirect Hunting Lodge for deletion

I have nominated Hunting Lodge, an article that you created, for deletion. I have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunting Lodge. (The content of the article that you created has already been moved to Philmont Scout Ranch camps, as you can see from its history, it is currently a redirect.) Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page. Thank you for your time. Cyfal (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

A question I have been dying to ask someone

I notice via the block log of Willy on Wheels (talk · contribs · block log) that you banned him from Wikipedia. I have been dying to learn this: why did you ban WoW from Wikipedia? What did Willy do to get himself banned?

P.S.: Per this edit to The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, I am concerned that Krazy Komodo (talk · contribs · block log) may be a sockpuppet of Willy. Pay close attention to the last line in the edit.

--Dylan620 (Home • yadda yadda yadda • Ooooohh!) 13:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Getting rusty

You're getting rusty in your old age: [1] ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 12:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ian Fleming.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ian Fleming.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats

Hi! As a bureaucrat on Wikipedia, I'd very much appreciate it if you would fill in your details on the newly updated Bureaucrats page. Thanks! Majorly ^talk 14:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Rdsmith4,

Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 21:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Can my talk page be renamed

Is it possible to remove the (usurp) from the title of my talk page?--Truco 02:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much.--Truco 03:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thank you.--Truco 04:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks like we need to contact a developer, my edits were not reassigned.--Truco 23:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Truco contacted me asking for help. It appears the edit history is still seperate. Any progress on this? If you're too busy I can try asking at the B'crat noticeboard for further help Nil Einne (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response and your effort. I know the developers can be a pretty busy bunch. I've let Truco know and explained the situation. Nil Einne (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit reassignment

I was previously known as SWik78 (talk · contribs) and have recently usurped Big Bird (talk · contribs). The rename was done on January 18 but my edits have not yet been re-assigned. I apologize if this seems as a trivial thing to bother you over but I wasn't sure if this is normal due to server lag since WP:CHU quotes "at most a day" for re-assignment to be done.

Thanks! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

(TPS) This is most likely because you have a high amount of edits. The only thing you can do is sit and wait. If it takes more than a week, I would try contacting a developer. Majorly talk 15:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. Thanks. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Majorly's right. This has happened several times lately -- you're not the only one in this boat. I guess the databases are struggling lately. (Majorly -- thanks for the helpful response.) — Dan | talk 23:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandal usernames

Can you do anything to keep him from just recreating the same bunch of names once you've renamed them? NawlinWiki (talk) 03:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Mockery_of_my_proposal_and_me

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Mockery_of_my_proposal_and_me. Thank you. Ipatrol (talk) 15:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard#Incivil personal attacks from Malleus Fatuorum

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard#Incivil personal attacks from Malleus Fatuorum. Thank you. Ipatrol (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Ottava Rima

Were you in communication with anyone about when you intended to close the RFA for Ottava Rima? Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

RfA closing

Hi Rdsmith4, sorry to bother you. The RfA you recently closed, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ottava Rima, has become the subject of edit warring because the nominee left a number of comments right before closing, and now some people who disagree with the comments have been reverting them after the closing. My impression was that the page should not be edited once it's closed, but I don't know if there are exceptions. Anyway, I'm wondering if it would be possible to have the page protected for a couple days. I left a note to similar effect at WT:RFA#Resolved. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Closed RfA

Please see. People feel the need to try and edit something that has ended. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and I'm just posting this because I think it is funny. I know that other people posted. However, the rule of comedy is to repeat something three times - obviously, people are unable to take things seriously. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, remind me later to chat with you about your Annapolis photo. That was right next to where I lived for a while. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Rdsmith4. You have new messages at Manadude2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NowCommons: File:Himeji Castle 3.jpg

File:Himeji Castle 3.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Himeji Castle.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Himeji Castle.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Excellent post

here. Kudos. Enigma^msg 04:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Heads up

WP:BN#Disputed closure of Davemeistermoab to admin.. They should have come here first, rather than immediately jumping to the 'crat noticeboard (especially since your closure statement said you'd be happy to answer any questions), but that can't be helped. Would have been nice if you'd been notified of the BN thread, but that can be helped. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

My oppose on an RFA you closed

I am curious if you took any opposes into account that did not have anything to do with "...Ottava Rima's comments about Dave's citation practices." I am asking because it appears you didn't address them in your closing statement. I do understand that long essays aren't standard in closing comments, but I figured it couldn't hurt to ask.--Rockfang (talk) 02:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Just in case you did not see it, I have left a question on WP:BN for you. Regards, — Aitias // discussion 19:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've spotted it and replied. — Dan | talk 20:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Dan, congrats on how well you are responding to this mess. I applaud your discipline.Dave (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You're welcome for the heads-up. Many thanks for your detailed reply there! :) Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 20:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

For a courageous and noble crat

		The Resilient Barnstar
		I hereby award this barnstar to Dan for his bravery in taking a tough decision for the benefit of the community, which he must have foreseen would likely provoke vocal opposition. Thanks to your boldness weve taken a big step towards a pleasant collaborative environment to build this encyclopaedia! FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

disputed involvement

I thank you for you comments, but I dispute your involvment in the project and I respectfuly request you to denounce your outdated authority or reapply for bureaucrat status as you are almost not involved in the project. Looking at your recent edits is a simple denial of your statements. Are you stating that you intend to become more involved in the project? You are almost not involved here, apart from this disputed decision. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC))

I dispute this request. Rdsmith4 is among our few long-term users, and his number of recent edits is irrelevant; he is very much a member of the community, and still has my trust. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

In fact Juliancolton, if you are coming here to declare your trust for Rdsmith4 then I agree with you. lets take it to the community as a discussion and a vote. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC))

Juliancolton, If I had wanted to discuss this with you, I would be in another place. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC))

This is a public talk page; if you wished to talk to Dan in private, you could have done so via e-mail, IRC, or one of the many off-wiki communication venues. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

@Off2riorob: Considering that Rdsmith4 is not in Category:Wikipedia bureaucrats open to recall, I don't think that your request will achieve much given that Rdsmith4 did not abuse his bureaucrat tools. — Aitias // discussion 22:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

RFC of Malleus Fatuorum

I invite you to comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Malleus Fatuorum, which I have filed.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No thanks. — Dan | talk 19:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Usurpation of my global account

First of all, sorry for disturb you but i have to ask someone and i choose you. Now, i'm using SkyCaptain account in local WikiTurkish. I want to take and use global account too. So i did write a message to User:SkyCaptain. He was very kind he applied for changing his username. After he apply one of sysops wanted one more approve from him but he's not a active user so he didn't answer it. Finally they didn't chenge his username. You may read message archive from here User_talk:SkyCaptain, i wrote him one more message one moths ago but he didn't reply me. Could you change his name as User:DavidBethune and give me my global account please?

Here's his application for changing his name... Wikipedia:Changing_username/Unfulfilled/2009/July#SkyCaptain_.E2.86.92_DavidBethune --85.101.98.158 (talk) 15:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC) (SkyCaptain)

University of Chicago GAR notice

University of Chicago has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my talk page! -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 07:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Roadcreature

Can you confirm that renaming User:Guido den Broeder is simply to remove his WP:REALNAME? I sincerely hope that this is not the first step in planning to allow him to edit again. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. — Dan | talk 02:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm a little confused by some of this. A user rename to avoid Google searches &c is perfectly fine, no problem there (although the sig's are still everywhere and will get picked up). Is the new User:Guido den Broeder account a scrambled password/unusable/non-usurpable account? (Forgive me if I'm reading the logs wrong here) Additionally, my understanding is that GdB had commented elsewhere on the internet using links to his en:wiki user talk page. Do these latest rename actions leave open the possibility of others clicking onto a confusing "create this now" page? I'm not saying that any pages using the editor's actual name should say "OMG this user is baninated!!", just asking about the possibility for confusion. Franamax (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and yes, RTV is overriding. If you are in private communication with GdB (and if my concern is valid), you might let him know that renaming the user account does nothing about existing sig's in talk pages, so Google is still going to find them, if I read robots.txt properly, and various mirror sites will be indexed by their own rules. A certain "Vanished user" once changed all their sig's, although they were not banned when they did it. Not sure how to proceed there.

I'll think about creating/annotating various pages. I would envision "This page has been moved and blanked as a courtesy to the editor." with possibly a link to the new user page. Would a link contravene RTV?

My remaining concern is whether the account is usurpable or not. I don't think GdB would be trying this and I don't know if it's already a SUL account. My concern is whether any clues are sufficiently left for a future usurpation request. For instance, I know enough French language to go register the account on any number of wikis and maybe take over the en:wiki account. A technical issue indeed and rest assured I won't be trying it, but nevertheless a technicality. Thanks & regards! Franamax (talk) 21:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

And how unfortunate it would be for some other person, with the same not-very-uncommon name, to innocently request that username, without any knowledge of what would happen. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Kww 3 - Bureaucrat discussion

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kww 3/Bureaucrat discussion

I've opened a bureaucrat chat in relation to this RfA as I don't think the outcome is particularly clear cut. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your input. WJBscribe (talk) 20:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder

I don't recall for sure, but I thought he was indef'd. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 20:36, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, he was; his block was reinstated by Arbcom some time ago.[2] Although presumably he will not be editing, as it appears his block has carried over, I will note for the record that he did not advise the Arbitration Committee of his plan to rename; see the relevant Arbcom expectations here. I would ask that you reinstate the redirects in this case. While Guido may claim that this is a privacy issue, in fact he uses this name widely on the internet, and uses it when discussing his activities on Wikipedia; given those facts, it is difficult to say that this is truly a "privacy" rename. Provided a link remains to the former account, however, I rather hope no additional action will be required. Risker (talk) 21:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I asked because I thought the "right to vanish" only applied to users in good standing, and it does not seem like Broeder is in good standing. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 21:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Guido is definitely NOT in good standing, he dodged an arbcom ruling doing this, and Risker is correct, any claim that this is a privacy issue simply doesn't wash. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

This user was banned under his old name and so remains banned under his new name (as I have now pointed out several times), and I have registered the old name and scrambled the password to avoid its being recreated. This rename in no way affects his status as a banned user. I would not have granted his request if there were any indication that he intended some mischief by it - but there is none. And, as always, everything is recorded in the logs for posterity (in response to Risker's comment). I fail to see any problems. — Dan | talk 22:28, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The problems are two: 1) he dodged the arbcom policy, 2) the "privacy" claim does not wash here. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:33, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The mistake was in the edit summary, "User has exercised his right to vanish from the English Wikipedia." That's not the case at all. It's simply a rename of a banned user - whose new name appears in the logs, but will only be known to those who happened to catch it today. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 22:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Dan, the problem is that in the last 24 hours I have been asked to oversight redirects, pages, and log entries because of the RTV claim. I just want to make sure that these things don't happen, because he really does not have a right to vanish, and we don't want to lose track of banned users. I'm often the easiest-to-contact oversighter, which is probably why I got the requests, but most others would not have known that oversighting the logs was not appropriate if they saw the "RTV" in the summary. I don't have a problem with the general concept of the rename. Risker (talk) 22:44, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I wrote "right to vanish" because that is what I intended it to be - I do not like to deny RTV to anyone, so long as there is no chance of its being used to evade a ban or other such. But I see a great many users have a keen interest in keeping track of this particular user, and since he's clearly not 'in good standing,' I won't argue the point any further. I yield my stake in this matter to the ArbCom and those who have dealt with him in the past. — Dan | talk 00:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Dan. Generally speaking, I stand behind your philosophy of liberal renaming and wouldn't want you to change :-) This is very definitely a rare and unusual situation. I should clarify that none of the requests for oversighting/suppression came from you; apparently the user showed up in IRC to pass through a request - logged in under his RL name - and as I was online, I got the requests. Thanks for understanding. Risker (talk) 00:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Cracket, a stool.

Dear Sir, I have recently used the term "cracket" in a somewhat humorous manner; in order to describe a three legged stool which had been put to use in order to bear a tea tray. I know the term is (or was) used in the coal mining areas of Northumberland and Durham. I feel that the term might have been used in East Anglia, but I cannot give a definite source of the word in that area. Any further information would be welcome, as Northumbrian dialects owe a lot to Norse influence. Eg Face = Fjace; Table = Tjable just to give two examples. John McNally Johnmac2307 (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting elections

You are receiving this notice as an active member of WikiProject Scouting. To change your status as a member, please edit Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Members.

Rlevse is retiring as our lead coordinator; see Stepping down as ScoutingWikiProject Lead Coordinator. Election for a new coordinator will be held after the new year. If you are interested in nominating yourself or another editor, please add the name to Project coordinator election.

Yours in Scouting
---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Einstein Memorial side view.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Einstein Memorial side view.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Chicago's

I have nominated Chicago's (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (in question) 22:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

SHUT UP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.101.90 (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat discussion for Juliancolton RfB

A bureaucrat discussion has been opened in order to determine the consensus in this request for adminship. Please come participate. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Leo Koch

Heh, so there's two of us at least who read Ebert's blog! Mackensen (talk) 11:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Christening

Hi, I see you reverted my edit of christening to naming back to christening. You say it is secular. No it is not. the word comes from the baptism of babies into the Christian religion. Hence the first 6 letters. It is a red flag to a bull to non christians even if you can't see that yourself. So as christening is offensive to some (if not to you) and naming is offensive to none then wouldn't naming be a better word? It offends me as a non Christian and I know for a fact it offends muslims and some jews I have spoken to. It's easy in the western world to use words like this without realising they cause offense but one of my objectives is to make wikipedia friendly to all cultures over the world. So whenever I come across words like christening and crusade I always edit them. Do you really mind? Robotics1 (talk) 19:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

This may help: Ship_naming_and_launching. As you see from that article the word christening applies to ships that have been launched using an actual Christian or sub-Christian ritual. If a thing was just named, in no particular ceremony then it was just named, not christened, which is a second reason for not using the word. Robotics1 (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, christening is etymologically related to Christ, and events of christening in earlier days necessarily involved a specifically Christian ritual. But, as I have pointed out, the term is regularly used today throughout the English-speaking world (with which I think I have a reasonably wide familiarity) to denote any old event, including a totally secular one, of bestowing a name; to a lesser degree, the same goes for baptism.

The secularization of the verb [to] christen with respect to the naming of ships, as long ago as the seventeenth century, is in fact described in the very article you mentioned, in the Early Modern Age section. If you'd prefer a dictionary attestation, consider the fifth definition of christen given by the OED (online edition): "gen. To name, give a name to; often with complement, to call by the name of. colloq.", citing a 1725 quotation in which the naming of a species of worm is called a christening, and an 1887 quotation in which the United States government is said to have christened a river in Alaska. Plainly neither of these was a ritual of the (or indeed any) Church.

As for baptism, it has become a philosophical term of art for any act of bestowing a name or other referring phrase in the work of Saul Kripke and Hilary Putnam, both secular thinkers. But I grant this is a bit more tenuous, as it is a technical sense of the term used by a particular group of specialists; however, the same does not go for christen: its secular sense is in extremely widespread informal use, as suggested by the OED tagging it "colloq[uial]."

Notice that a great many English words - indeed a great many words in any language whose speakers have been historically Christian - have historically carried Christian connotations, but have lost them as Christianity has become less significant to the societies using the words. Deeply buried in the histories of many terms having to do with "inspiration" and the like lies an imagery of divine intervention; similarly, the method of clinical psychology, and psychoanalysis before it, has its roots in medieval Christian pastoral and especially confessional practices; its terminology reflects this history as well.

So, while I appreciate your interest in eliminating Christian biases (or, presumably, culture-specific biases of any kind) from Wikipedia, I think you are going about it in the wrong way. Etymology - the history of words, both of their forms and their meanings - is the wrong place to look for these biases. If you try to remove all historically Christian words from Wikipedia in a consistent and systematic way, you will quickly realize that this is a truly enormous task, which moreover would cripple article-writers by depriving them of a large portion of their verbal resources.

Instead, I suggest that you look to current usage in Standard English, either American or UK/Commonwealth (Wikipedia has traditionally been split between these according to the topic of each article). If you do this, I think you will find no reason to object to the word christen.

As for its being potentially offensive - well, it is not thought to be so by speakers of Standard English. The claim that it is offensive is an ideologically-motivated political tactic intended to bring about a change in Standard English, but it is not the proper role of Wikipedia to promote such changes: this would amount to taking sides in a political struggle. Wikipedia has traditionally avoided problems of the politics of language - how many people must find a word offensive before we exclude it from Wikipedia? how can we verify claims of offensiveness, lest we go around expurgating from our vocabulary any word that anybody objects to? - by using Standard English as documented by widely accepted authorities like dictionaries. I admit this approach is not without its shortcomings, but it's the best and most practical we've come up with so far.

Crusade is a different matter, of course, since in current usage it implies a negative value judgment of its referent: to call something a crusade is also to indicate that you disapprove of it. It is excluded from Wikipedia purely on grounds of its non-neutrality, not because of any supposed religious connotation. Cheers — Dan | talk 21:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Well you certainly have given me a worthy reply! I appreciate what you say about the secularization of words, colloquial so to speak, but to many the original meanings are still understood. The dictionary definitions are to name at baptism or dedicate (as a ship) by a ceremony suggestive of baptism and the colloquial comes a long way down. Similar things that irritate are AD (Anno Domini) - clearly not applicable to other religions who prefer CE (Common Era) and BCE. So many publishers avoid them. Even in Wikipedia I can see CE sometimes being used in preference to AD and there is even an article on the subject. I didn't know crusade was excluded. But it is also often used without realizing its true meaning, as in "a crusade against drink driving".

I understand too your worry that expurgating any old words someone objects to could get out of hand. However these words are already expurgated from publications that know the difference, for example the BBC news. Wikipedia is of course written by many people, most of whom are in the USA or at least in English speaking countries and may be unaware of the connotations. Because the writers are predominantly in the Western culture Wikipedia will always have that leaning. It can't be avoided. I certainly do not systematically go through Wiki editing those words, only when I come across one that stands out as being incorrect I will take that opportunity. Yes there are similar abused words from other religions that I might also be tempted to edit. Zen for example.

Again I say to you that christening is offensive to a great many whereas naming is not. But I don't feel *that* strongly about it. Leave it as christen if you must.

Thanks for the discussion. Robotics1 (talk) 21:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Rdsmith4! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 9 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Peter Bowler - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Gianmaria Bruni - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Phoinix (software)

I have nominated Phoinix (software), 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/Phoinix (software). 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Psychonaut (talk) 23:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

URBI is it allowed?

Is this allowed? URBI It is a good robot language designed by a French university team but the page seems promotional full of links to their own site. I don't know. I have a COI feeling. Robotics1 (talk) 18:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

oh dear, forget it. I've just seen its been there since 2007. Put there by the creators but no-one noticed. Robotics1 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom GA review

A review to see if Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria has started, and has been put on hold. Suggestions for improvement are at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/GA2, and are mainly to do with coverage and neutrality, and building the lead section. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is one of our most high profile and popular articles, attracting an average of over 11,000 readers every day. You have made more than 20 edits to the article, and so you might be interested in helping to make the improvements needed to get it listed as a Good Article. SilkTork *^YES! 12:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Himeji Castle gargoyle.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Himeji Castle gargoyle.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Libyans (band)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Libyans (band). 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/Libyans (band). 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) 01:06, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Burton–Judson Courts

The article Burton–Judson Courts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable building

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TM 04:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Burton–Judson Courts

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. TM 14:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3. I thought you might want to sign up for Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1 from 10:30-11:45 a.m. on Saturday May 1, 2010 at the UIC Student Center West,.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Timeline Princes of Monaco

A file that you uploaded, Template:Timeline Princes of Monaco, has been listed in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion because it is not an image, sound or video file and does not appear to have any encyclopedic use. See section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you feel that this file has a use in the encyclopedia, please place the {{hangon}} tag on Template:Timeline Princes of Monaco, then go to its talk page (by clicking Discussion at the top of that page) and insert an explanation of how the file is useful to the encyclopedia. Thank you. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 02:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tom Travers

The article Tom Travers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines for fictional characters.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Neelix (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Untitled fourth album listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Untitled fourth album. Since you had some involvement with the Untitled fourth album redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). — ξ^xplicit 08:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Watkyn Bassett for deletion

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

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

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Neelix (talk) 14:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Account Removal

Hi There

I was wondering if you could please have my accounts renamed, user page and user talk pages deleted. I don't want to use this account anymore as DOC can be seen as to represent the Department Of Conservation.

If this can not be done can my account name please be changed. I don't mind what it is changed to because I will no longer use it.

Thanks Merry Christmas! DOClocations (talk) 02:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Lalitha DasarRadhakrishnan T H (talk) 05:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Rdsmith4

I would like to create a Page on 'Lalitha Dasar' and also one o his Son T K RadhaKrishnan - A renowned flautist who recently passed away. Understand that you've deleted content that was already posted... Can you Pls revert as to why the earlier content was deleted ... Regards...RadhaKrishnan T HRadhakrishnan T H (talk) 05:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Formula One listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Formula One. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Formula One redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Mhiji 13:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, Rdsmith4/Archive 10! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 21:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:FPArchiveBarJanuary2006

Template:FPArchiveBarJanuary2006 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 22:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Renaming of Account

Hello, Rdsmith4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Seow.johnjoel (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

New Name

Hey, can you change my name, thank you. Please. Spesh531, My talk, and External links 17:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC) Change it completely from User:The spesh man to User:Spesh531 Spesh531, My talk, and External links 17:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

FYI

As an FYI, please note that an editor has objected to a usurpation you carried out in 2008. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations#JamesR (usurped) → JamesR (perm). –xeno^talk 13:45, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

it.Brancusi Vs en.Brancusi

Hello, I'm an italian wiki user. My user name is Brancusi. I am a Wikipedia user since January 10, 2007. On March 07, 2011 I did the global account. I've seen that there is a user named Brancusi like me on en.wikipedia that has been registered since October 26, 2007, but with no edit. I would like to add that account to my Brancusi global account. I read that I have to ask to an english Bureaucrat to obtain it. So I ask you. The English Brancusi account is an inactive account. You could rename it so that I can add en.Brancusi to my global account? Thanks in advance for your answer, my best regards. Brancusi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.38.61.215 (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Problem completely solved: sorry for thist useless message :) --Brancusi (talk) 00:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of hotels for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of hotels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hotels until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mtking (talk) 07:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of hotels for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of hotels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hotels until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JaGa^talk 06:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC) ~

Hello, Rdsmith4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Requested Move of "Frank Williams"

This is so far back that you may not even remember it, but at your request in 2004, Frank Williams was changed from a rather sparse disambiguation page to one specifically for Sir Frank Williams involved in Formula One racing. In the intervening years, the Frank Williams (disambiguation) page has grown so greatly that I suggested last night on Talk:Frank Williams that the move should be reversed and a suitable new title found for the present article about Sir Frank. Someone else (with astonishing speed) took up my suggestion and initiated a formal motion at Talk:Frank Williams#Proposed move. I would of course be interested in seeing your comments. Best wishes for the weekend. —— Shakescene (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Rdsmith4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

UOJComm (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

changing Wlwhyte1's username

Hello - I desperately need to change my username to Dpowbail2, from Wlwhyte1. I'm not very versed in Wikipedia, so I would love your help!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlwhyte1 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bumpers (album)

The article Bumpers (album) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable comp

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Midway Review

The article The Midway Review has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NMEDIA; No notability established.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ost (talk) 13:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Woodrow wilson signature.png

A tag has been placed on File:Woodrow wilson signature.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

sockpuppet editing

There is an open WP:SPI case looking at sockpuppet editing primarily on the Johann Hari/ Talk page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed.

Edited on your user page

Dear Rdsmith4. I removed the steward notice on your user page (see here) as you're not a steward anymore. This removes you from the category too. Trijnstel (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Commonspiped listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Commonspiped. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Commonspiped redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). MGA73 (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hi, I want you to rename my user and to abandon it if it is possible, please. Thank you! Thai Land F (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Rename User:Nealt

Hello, I want to complete creation of SUL in wikipedia projects, but name Nealt in en-wiki already reserved by user, which has no activity in this project (contribution). Could you rename it?

Nealt 11:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.68.68.137 (talk)

Hi I would like to change my username

My account was just created today, but I no longer want to use it so, since I can't delete it, is there a way I can change my username from KimCyanide to (NoName)? If you can do this, thanks a lot!KimCyanide (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)KimCyanide

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah. The user made a few edits on 8 November 2012, thus resetting the suspension of administrative permissions for another year. See userpage for user status and plans. Bishzilla loves you, Dan! bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:47, 9 October 2012 (UTC).

I wish to change my username

Hello Rdsmith4, I would like to change my username to MoonLight; if you could change it I'd be much appreciated. Thank you. I have also sent you an email message to notify, I hope you don't mind as I would like it to be changed as soon as possible.

--Alice.pinder (talk) 21:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Crat statement draft

Hi Following the drama at BN, I'm trying to come up with a statement all Crats could agree to. Please take a look, below. I am quite content to do this onwiki -we have always worked transparently, except where secrecy is essential (ie RTV). I think we should be able to wordsmith a statement acceptable to all, and I think it's an important thing to do.

1. In my opinion, this issue has come about through an unfortunate proliferation of documentation: policy, guideline, how-to etc
2. I am not convinced that there is community consensus on all of the points encapsulated in those various pages
3. I am unhappy at what may be described as some or all of: inconsistencies, inaccuracies or lack of clarity in that documentation
4. I do not believe that any of the issues we have faced have been caused by Crats trying to widen their powers
5. I would like to see the issues clarified, based on consensus, and for the documentation to be updated accordingly
6. I'd like to thank Griot-de for generously withdrawing the rename request

Signed [crat sig] Lmk what you think. Many thanks, --Dweller (talk) 14:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Forced user renames coming soon for SUL

Hi, sorry for writing in English. I'm writing to ask you, as a bureaucrat of this wiki, to translate and review the notification that will be sent to all users, also on this wiki, who will be forced to change their user name on May 27 and will probably need your help with renames. You may also want to help with the pages m:Rename practices and m:Global rename policy. Thank you, Nemo 13:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

FPC notice

Letting you know in case you ever check this talk page — you might want to pop in at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Sake barrels.jpg, where we're considering defeaturing an image that you nominated for FP. Nyttend (talk) 05:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dodie Brando

The article Dodie Brando has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No notability outside of son.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 10:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Note that your bureaucrat bit has also been removed per the same policy. As with the admin bit, it too can also be restored if you choose to return and ask for it back as detailed above. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 10:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

nervous_testpilot

Hi

I'm planning to add an article about the band nervous_testpilot, and I see that you've previously deleted the article (some nine years ago). Could you telle me some more of why the article was deleted. If I don't hear from you, I'll assume it's ok to create it.

Yellowish listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Yellowish. Since you had some involvement with the Yellowish redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Beatlemanía listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Beatlemanía. Since you had some involvement with the Beatlemanía redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Tavix | Talk  05:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Implementation of Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Bureaucrat activity requirements

You are receiving this message because you are listed at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Former bureaucrats. Writ Keeper pointed out that these users were not directly notified of the community discussion ending August 2015, where consensus was reached to remove the bureaucrat permissions of users who have not participated in bureaucrat activity for three years.

As of 1 October 2015, any former bureaucrat who has not participated in bureaucrat activity for three years that wishes their bureaucrat permissions restored will need to request reinstatement at RFB.

If you intend to return to bureaucrat activity, please request restoration of permissions before 1 October 2015 or three years passes since your last bureaucrat activity, whichever is later.

“ Bureaucrats are expected to exercise the duties granted by their role while remaining cognizant of relevant community standards concerning their tasks. In addition to the "Inactive bureaucrat accounts" requirements, if a bureaucrat does not participate in bureaucrat activity for over three years, their bureaucrat permissions may be removed. The user must be notified on their talk page and by email one month before the removal, and again and a few days prior to the removal. If the user does not return to bureaucrat activity, another bureaucrat may request the removal of permissions at meta:Steward requests/Permissions. Permissions removed for not meeting bureaucrat activity requirements may be re-obtained through a new request for bureaucratship. ”

To assist with the implementation of this requirement, please see Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity. Modeled after Wikipedia:Inactive administrators and similar to that process, the log page will be created on 1 September 2015. Bureaucrats who have not met the activity requirements as of that date will be notified by email (where possible) and on their talk page to advise of the pending removal.

If the notified user does not return to bureaucrat activity and the permissions are removed, they will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFB. Removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon the affected user in any way.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. –xeno^talk 20:53, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• Please note that any potential restoration of permissions is also subject to Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Inactive bureaucrat accounts: a former bureaucrat who has been completely inactive for three years would need to seek reinstatement at WP:RFB notwithstanding the above. –xeno^talk 12:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Other events of 1996 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other events of 1996. Since you had some involvement with the Other events of 1996 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Other decades listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other decades. Since you had some involvement with the Other decades redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Other recent deaths listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other recent deaths. Since you had some involvement with the Other recent deaths redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:00, 22 August 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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Other millennia listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other millennia. Since you had some involvement with the Other millennia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Einstein Memorial.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Einstein Memorial.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:F1 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:F1. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:F1 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 07:17, 22 November 2016 (UTC)