User talk:Trialsanderrors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DRV

Hey Trialsanderrors, I saw you've decided to overturn the deletion of the article Terrorist attacks carried out by the LTTE. Thanks for that because regardless of the AFD discussion, I believe the closing admins reasons for deleting the article were flawed.
I'm not entirely sure how the process works, but you've said you are going to relist it for AFD. Does that mean the article is restored and then a new AFD is begun? If so can you please point me in the direction of the AFD discussion cos I haven't been able to find it yet. And I was also wondering why the article is still redirected to another article? (it's a double redirect in fact)
Thanks for any help. --snowolfD4^{( talk / @ )} 03:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, sorry this was just a mess of redirects and I couldn't find an actual article. I'm starting the AfD now with your link above. ~ trialsanderrors 03:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah there were loads of redirects for that page so no prob. Thanks for the quick response. Hope we'll get another productive AFD discussion. --snowolfD4^{( talk / @ )} 03:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re : Evil albino

Oh, I didn't know a merge was already ongoing. By DRV consensus the deletion probably gets an overturn and history restored, so please do so anyway (and close the discussion if you want). And yeah, talking to me first would have been a better thing. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

D'oh, I think that bulk of that comment was meant for me... Anyway, thanks for the partial (sufficient!) restore. I'll get on that merge ASAP. And chat with Mailer.— SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 21:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] rgd free Invision Power Board hosts category

the least you can do is answer when someone points out that your procedures were not executed as they should have been. Francinne 18:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

??? ~ trialsanderrors 18:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

read the comments users make before you decide to close something. see [1]. The text that was typed in the category has not been merged. If you decide to merge 2 categories, then you have to merge the text of that category as well. Francinne 20:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I read the comments. I did not see where your opinion got any support. Vociferousness does not equal strength of argument. ~ trialsanderrors 20:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DRV closing process

I noticed you've been doing a lot of the lifting at DRV recently, so I thought you might be able to shed some light on this. First, at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 6, why does "Mer" still have a section "edit" control? Shouldn't this be gone? Second, how come DRV closings do identify the closing admin? Seems like they should so people would know who to ask. Also, I don't see any DRV closings with comments—seems like there must be some close calls here that would warrant a closing comment.

Just curious questions for my own information as I haven't closed any DRV's yet. —Doug Bell ^talk 02:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I also meant to ask why there are two "show" links on a closed and collapsed DRV discussion? —Doug Bell ^talk 02:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

A lot of this stuff is just passed down by force of habit. I take it AfD closures weren't signed until recently and it hasn't spilled over to DRV yet. As it is, it's mostly Xoloz or me doing the closures, so it's not that hard to figure out who closed it. If the reforms catch on and get other admins to close DRV's I can see that signing closures might become more common. Also DRV closures are more count-based and they're not appealable, so there is less need to explain a closure. I'm currently working on archiving AfD's and I might add an optional explanation box, but I first have to figure out how IF statements are implemented in templates. The section header above Mer was necessary because it was a speedy close, so the section should stay intact until all the daily discussions are closed. I'm not sure why you see to Show tags. It might be because of the browser you use. The navbox templates aren't particularly well coded. Hope it helps, trialsanderrors 03:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ali Sina

You closed and endorsed the deletion review of Ali Sina at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 5. Can you tell me why the new sources that were not reviewed in the original AfD did not allow a relist? They are the three comments beginning with "relist" at the bottom of that review, and the textbook thing looks very obviously notable to me. Why weren't these new items sufficient for a relist? Thanks for your time, — coelacan talk — 03:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

DRV is mostly numbers-based, and a decision on the closure of the AfD rather than the article itself. The consensus opinion was that the closure was within policy. If you have sources that you think didn't get enough attention I recommend presenting them to the closer and ask for userfication, so that you can work them into the article. ~ trialsanderrors 03:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry I thought you were the closer? — coelacan talk — 04:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The closer of the AfD, which I think was User:Mackensen. ~ trialsanderrors 04:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't get it. Mackensen implied it was no longer in his territory... see User talk:Mackensen#Ali Sina deletion review.

Now I don't even know where I was supposed to go with those sources. — coelacan talk — 04:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have no grounds to overrule him on this. His comment that your sources merit a stub article not the recreation of the old article makes sense. Remember we're supposed to write the article from sources, not just find sources to permit us to write what we want. If you think the article might survive a future AfD based on the sources you should go ahead and rewrite it. ~ trialsanderrors 04:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

But how are we supposed to rewrite the article if it's a protected redirect? — Rickyrab | Talk 05:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You can take what you have in your user space at User:Rickyrab/Ali Sina, source it, and when you think it's ready request a review at WP:DRV. ~ trialsanderrors 06:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)