User talk:AGK/Archive/5

The following user talk subpage an archive of archived discussions on User talk:AGK. Please do not modify it. New discussions should be raised through this link; to contact this user, see User:AGK/Contact. For an overview of old discussions, see User talk:AGK/Archive.

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

[edit] Sooner Dave's ApologyNote

Note from Anthony: no need to apologise!

Hey, I came to check on what's going on. I've been so busy at school that I've forgotten that I was an editor! I've forgotten many things you have to. Please forgive me, and I'll be editing during the Summer for sure and maybe a few times here and there. Sooner Dave 7 March 2007

No problem! We're all volunteers here, and I follow WP:NEHAMFTAY. Anyway, don't hesitate to ask me a question using the link at the top of the newly redesigned classroom! anthonycfc ^[talk] 23:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict#Mediation_Location

Hi Anthony. I believe the dispute is resolved. Thanks so much for following up with everyone on the dispute. It was a long, drawn out discussion (especially with the long absenses of the parties involved at times), but you showed great fortitude to see it through, which I very much appreciate. While I hope we can avoid future disputes, it's great to know that helpful mediators like yourself are around to aid us, and I'd welcome your input and mediation at any time. Thank again. — George Saliba ^[talk] 00:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks George! Signing off just now, but it's a barnstar for civility in your direction next day :P see you soon.

Until then,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ouch - same talk link in signatures; promise I didn't copy it from anybody - including yourself :P anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

No worries. Even if you had, I wouldn't mind. :) However, now that I know how to create barnstars, I have no choice but to retaliate by awarding you:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your patience, diligence, and thoroughness in mediating the WP:MEDCABAL/Israel-Lebanon conflict case, I, George Saliba, hereby award Anthony the Barnstar of Diligence! — George Saliba [talk]

(Sorry, I couldn't figure out where to put this on your Userpage. I'm sure you have a whole stack of them somewhere, but I'll leave it up to you to place it where you like.:) ) Cheers, and thanks again! — George Saliba ^[talk] 00:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Thank you for your work. Iorek85 10:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh shucks :P yeah, it's at user:anthony cfc/Awards, which was taken down to make way for that little statement I made. Anyway, thanks - couldn't have done it without a willing Wikipedian such as yourself! anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar, I don't know what to say! Nobody messes with user pages of people on my watchlist. Thanks again, you're a very respected editor and this is very much appreciated Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers a bunch :) don't hesitate to call on me, if you need anything or just for a chat! anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation Cabal

Salam. How can I participate in this great work and help the others with consensus building.--Sa.vakilian 19:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

That's easy! Visit WP:MEDCABAL, and just take a case! The Mediation Cabal is informal - there's no fixed member list, or guidelines - MedCabalists just rise to the call of duty when they feel like it.

My advice in MedCabal cases is that you must remain neutral in all your comments, emails and communications.

So, visit WP:MEDCABAL and scroll to the cases needing mediatiors section, and see if any cases catch your eye.

If you've got any questions, let me know right away, and I'll give you a hand. In addition, I could take a case on a joint basis with you if you need a hand.

Awaiting your reply,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 19:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Everything2

Hi! I was wondering if you knew if articles on Everything2 can be used as a reliable source. Please let me know. Thanks. --Shamir1 22:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Good evening (GMT time); nice to hear from you! Hope that JfJ dispute is still in the bag :P I think what you're looking for is Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Reliable sources, which details what is a reliable source and what is not. My impression is that Everything2 is a reliable source - it appears to be supervised (only site admins can edit these writeups) and thus contain fairly accurate information.

However, I strongly encourage you to review the page cited - it's a must if you do lot's of article writing.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Current events/Sidebar

Hey Anthony, I saw you added somethings that seemed... amiss to the purpose of Portal:Current events/Sidebar. I have removed them for the time being. Generally the Portal:Current events/Sidebar is a calendar used to post current events. It was probably a mistake for I don't really see someone such as yourself intentionally adding links to the Portal:Transportation. =) Mkdw^talk 02:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies - I was using parts of the code from the sidebar for a little experiment at a trains wikiproject. I must have saved that tab rather than the TWP tab. Please accept my apologies, and thanks for reverting!

With apologies,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 02:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello friend :)

Nothing really; just doing my "wikijobs" however at a decreased level lately. In real life I have been very busy and most recently I have been sick (bad cold) so editing time isn't at its highest. Hopefully Wikipedia is treating you well; oh yeah this is for you :D.

		The Original Barnstar
		I Arjun award you Anthony cfc this barnstar for your willingness to improve as a Wikipedian and be an overall good chap. ~ Arjun 02:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm just being swamped with *s today (well, 2 :) thanks a lot Arjun! Hope you're well, and happy editing! anthonycfc ^[talk] 02:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, never seen the post above the barnstar (thanks again, btw); sorry to hear you're under the weather - get well soon! Liking the minimal user page - sometimes less is more :) don't hesitate to drop by any time, to give some much-wanted advice, or just a chat!

Kind regards
anthonycfc ^[talk] 02:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello ^_^

This is a thank you for working on Wikipedia. Every edit helps! Have a wonderful day.
Saber girl08 04:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-02-03 Category:Kurdistan

What is the status of this case? --Ideogram 04:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Good question. It's got a Requests for Comment up at the moment, here, that directs the user to the above (MedCabal page). However, Cool Cat is the one to consult here regarding CfD - I don't seem to be getting anywhere.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If there is no discussion it would seem there is nothing to mediate. Can we close the case? --Ideogram 07:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Defer comment until later date, pending consultation with other parties. anthonycfc ^[talk] 18:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFCU and clerks

Greetings! A recent change has been made in the clerking system at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. There are no longer any obstacles to editors who wish to help out in this areas, as the standby list has now been deprecated. You were listed as a volunteer on the standby list before it was deprecated. If you are still interested in helping out in this area, please:

• Consider adding yourself to the list of active clerks at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks.
• In helping, please make sure you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Procedures as it is very important to the process there to follow these instructions for smooth operation.
• Please remember "Trust between the clerks and the checkusers is essential. Clerks who persistently make problematic comments on requests or otherwise violate decorum may be asked by the checkusers to cease contributing here."
• Add Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks/Noticeboard to your watchlist to stay up to do date on the latest communications happening regarding this role.
• "Be aware that this position is rather dull and carries no particular prestige; status-seeking will not be looked upon kindly."

I am not involved with the checkuser system. I am acting only to inform you of this change. Thank you. --Durin 14:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confirmation

Please confirm that this is really you. Thanks. G.He 22:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I confirm that this user and I are the same person. anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. G.He 23:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. G.He 00:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Saw it whilst browsing - thanks a lot. anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible TechCrunch Mediation Compromise Reached

Anthony cfc, looks like we may have reached a solution Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-03-01_TechCrunch#Compromise_2. Would be curious to see what you think as I'm eager to start finally fixing up the article. Thanks for mediating. Jonathan Stokes 22:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I've implemented the edit. anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and patience. Jonathan Stokes 23:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar, Anthony. It is my first. For what it's worth, I decided to cover the story on my blog. All the best, Jonathan Stokes 01:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem; I never knew you had a blog :) anyway, I've left a comment there. Don't hesitate to drop by to say hi any time! anthonycfc ^[talk] 01:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usurpation clerking

Hi, previous practice has been to tag withdrawn requests with {{not done}} so that the Bot archives them to Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations/Rejected/1. Unless the crats have requested a change in practice, its probably best to make sure rejected and withdrawn requests end up in the archives. Yours, WjBscribe 01:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Good evening; thanks a lot for that! This is my second day of clerking, and there doesn't appear to be any documentation for WP:CHU or its subpage, upsurpation. I'll make sure to remember that!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 01:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA nomination

Should you be nominated as administrator at this point? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meteoroid (talk • contribs)

Good question. I've been thinking about requesting the extra buttons to help out; I'm particularly interested in backlog-clearing. However, what with the CheckUser clerking just started, as well as my current aim to clear the WP:GAC backlog, may I postpone for a while?

It's great to see the community trusts me enough to offer nomination, but I'd like to complete my current goals before taking on more!

Kindest regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 13:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK Railways Portal

If your removing shortcuts, you need to go through Redirects for Discussion and have the re-directs deleted rather than just removing them from the relevant section on the portal. It would have been nice to have been consulted over the large changes you've made to the portal. Still, no harm done. -- Nick ^t 20:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

It would also have been nice to think that my contributions have been positive, rather than being cautioned for them, and my edits blank reverted, to put a fine point on it.

I don't want to create a fuss over this, and I most certainly would like to refrain from making an enemy out of you, so I'll drop Portal:UK Railways, and focus my energy elsewhere.

Regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 21:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Post script: just to let you know, you can link internally by dropping the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/-" prefix on the link, and placing the remaining text like so: [[remaining text]] or [[remaining text|text to actually show]]; hence: [[Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion|Redirects for Discussion]] would be shown as Redirects for Discussion. Just thought you might like to know, as it is a much quicker way of linking, and also allows to link to shortcuts (for example, WP:GAC.) Hope this helps. anthonycfc ^[talk] 21:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email Request

Good afternoon; nice header - useful links .. might nick it :P just kidding. I'd like to contact you over a more private matter, or one that I'd rather not spill over the Wiki. Would it be possible for me to email you, or for you to activate email for a few minutes?

Your address would remain extremely confidential, and I'd like to think you could trust me to not disclose it in any way, shape or form.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 13:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Post script: great VC lesson!

Thanks for the compliments. Feel free to use the headers or anything else. It's all Gnu to me. I'm pretty sure my email is activated. I'll check, and fix it if it isn't. Will be right back. The Transhumanist   23:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Just checked it, and my email is still activated. To send me an email, click "E-mail this user" in the toolbox menu in the sidebar. The Transhumanist   23:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Tried to email you there; received this message: this user does not have a valid email address set, or has chosen not to receive email from users. This is the standard no-email-set address. Have you verified your address? anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I've received email there before, but I'll check it again. Will be right back. The Transhumanist   01:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember there being activation click-boxes. No wonder I haven't received any email there in awhile! I've reactivated it. The Transhumanist   01:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! I'll kick the email in your direction now. anthonycfc ^[talk] 01:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Email sent. anthonycfc ^[talk] 01:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply sent. The Transhumanist   02:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You got mail

Email, that is.

The Transhumanist   02:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

So do you :) anthonycfc ^[talk] 03:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spellings

Hi Anthony, please don't change AE to BE or vice versa until there's a compelling reason. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Good evening; sorry, could you clarify what AE/BE is? Thanks; anthonycfc ^[talk] 05:24, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:REQT and Infobox film

Regarding asking WikiProject film about adding professional review links to infobox film, you wrote "rejected by the WikiProject as unnecessary". I looked but could not find any discussion regarding professional reviews, only amateur/community ones. Would you mind pointing out where this discussion was? —dgies^t_c 05:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The proposal was suggested at the WikiProject talk page, under this section. The extra fields were then said to be unrequired. There was no formal review, etc.., simply the community the template was primarily used by saying they didn't need it. anthonycfc ^[talk] 05:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Myrtle Avenue Line (surface)

I'm curious to know how you would structure the article, and where you would find freely-licensed images of the line. --NE2 07:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm aware this sounds highly hypocritical of me, but article-writing isn't my strong point (although reviewing is :) the best bet is to look up wikimedia commons, or online and then request permission to use it.

As for structure, the article simply needs a bit of TLC from a WikiGnome :) for example, the sections seem too short to not appear clustered together; in addition, although lots of citations are great, they are taking up too much room; why not replace the <references/> tag with:

<div class="references-2column">
<references />
</div>

This sorts the references into two columns, thus taking up half of the room. Don't forget to keep the "References" section headline!

Hope this helps!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why you couldn't have fixed the columns. As for the sections, it seems clearest to describe the current route first, then talk about its history. I have looked for images in the Library of Congress archives and the New York Public Library archives, and have not found any; this is a relatively obscure subject. --NE2 07:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The columns don't seem to work for me; I changed the code but it's still showing up as one column. Does it only work in some browsers? --NE2 07:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't use the word obscure - just look at the London Underground GA I recently passed, Tyne and Wear Metro, which receives a similar amount of traffic as Myrtle Avenue Line (surface), and yet I placed an "excellent" for it's images requirement during my review summary.

At the end of the day, I am a fairly strict reviewer, and I hold articles to one key feature - that they look good. This article has certainly come a long way, and it is very important you realise that I think your contributions have been excellent. It is simply that you listed for a GA Nomination, and received some advice. Hopefully the advice will be put into practice to continue to improvement curve the article has started.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that I don't understand how it can be improved. If I knew what to do, I'd do it, but I don't. --NE2 07:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It looks great to me; arranged in the two collums like is supposed to. I'm using FireFox, which is by far the highest-quality browser out, and much better for viewing Wikipedia than IE. It's also the choice browser for Wikipedians. What browser are you operating on? anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I use K-Meleon, which is, as I understand it, pretty close to Firefox. --NE2 07:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

So there's no difference to the references section? anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No, not in K-Meleon. In Firefox, it goes in two columns as expected. --NE2 07:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

That's it then; it's not that important - I was simply demonstrating the small changes that make the difference to the article. Hopefully that's the dispute resolved then? If so, then happy editing - but don't hesitate to drop me a message here if you need any more assistance!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) So do you feel it's a Good Article now, or are there other things that you think could be improved? --NE2 07:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it's definitely not a good article at the moment. It does, however, have the potential to be one. Just keep at it, and make sure to keep up the great work collecting all those references. These users are WikiGnomes, who make small edits to prettify an article. Whilst you're keeping up the great work on heavy duty article research, you could contact one of those users to make the article look allround better!

I'm a bit of a WikiGnome myself, when it comes to it, so I might squeeze in a few edits in a week or so, but in the meanwhile, hop over to one of these user's talk pages and make a polite enquiry asking if they'd be interested in a little task.

Good luck, happy editing and keep up the great work.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I still don't understand what could be improved. --NE2 07:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Everything! Research at your local library, online or at the website of the company or organisation that runs the firm. Just keep adding information, and soon it'll be ready for GA status. At present, it's at starting quality but it does have great potential. anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what could be added; it's a comprehensive article about a typical former streetcar line converted to a bus route. Do you see any holes in the history? --NE2 07:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I could not say - I am not an expert in writing articles in this topic area. I do know the article is not a GA - please review WP:GA? for the GA Criteria, and then work from there. anthonycfc ^[talk] 08:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I've read over that, and think it meets the criteria. Can you please point out which ones you don't think it meets? --NE2 08:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) I did, at the original review at Talk:Myrtle Avenue Line (surface); listen, I have persevered with you, but it is plain to see that you are not willing to accept my criticism. I'm going to hand you over to another GA Reviewer if you don't mind. anthonycfc ^[talk] 08:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you for allowing for a third opinion. As for the original review, I've asked for clarification on how I could improve on those point, and have not gotten an answer. --NE2 08:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I might be being to blunt here, but in short everything needs to be improved - the article simply is not good enough at the moment. However, I won't say any more on the matter - you have handled the dispute immesely, and I thank you for being so civil and similtaneously standing up for what you see as correct, but it is obvious to me we are getting nowhere. I've asked for an immediate speedy re-review of the article, as oppose to a standard GA Review or re-nomination at WP:GAC; the post can be seen here.

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 08:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pallywood

[The above] article was initially under a delete attempt^[1] and now is hijacked by users ChrisO and CJCurrie (28 edits/reverts in the past 14 days - Feb 25 to Mar 11^[2]). requesting advocacy/advice on the issue as it seems the editors are mass reverting, while ignoring content, together to avoid the WP:3RR. Jaakobou 09:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Note: - set links as references and added references section; corrected grammar of post; linked users.

Accepting case -- 14:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC); anthonycfc ^[talk] 14:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

[edit] WP:RFCU Archiving

Thanks for the archiving work at RFCU! As a note, the process of archiving doesn't require a clerknote, as it is redundant (all cases get archived to /Case). Cheers, and keep up the great work, Daniel Bryant 09:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Good afternoon; thanks for the compliment! I've been monitoring WP:RFCU for ages now, so I've got the basic idea - all I need now is experience. Regarding archiving, I wasn't aware that for the clerk action of archiving, there is an exception to the rule of annotating Clerk edits with {{clerknote}}. I'll bear that in mind!

Regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 14:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mitsubishi i

With regards to the apparent failure of this article to meet good article standards solely on the basis of it being "filled to the brim with jargon", may I direct your attention to both Maserati MC12 and Talbot Tagora. Specifically, the "Overview" section of the Maserati article, and the "Development" section of the Talbot Tagora page. Both of these articles seem to have as many unexplained sections of jargon (they use wikilinks instead), and both of these have been passed as featured articles within the last six months.

You recommended I read Wikipedia:Explain jargon. I did. It says "Be sure to make use of the Wiki format and link the term if there is a relevant article." and "The aim is to hyperlink all jargon to explain it, and then explain all the jargon you use to explain that, until you've reached terms that ordinary educated people should understand." The Mitsubishi i page contains exactly 200 wikilinks at present, depite being smaller than 20kB; a wikilink for every 100 bytes. I'm aware of the need to avoid unexplained jargon, hence text like this:

• "The i has a "rear-midship" engine mounted just ahead of the rear axle, a highly unusual configuration in a small car, where front-engine design has dominated since the 1970s.^[9]"

A more complete description than that for the similary "rear-midship" Maserati MC12, including a brief expansion, three wikilinks and an external reference.

• "The 3B20 three cylinder powerplant has an aluminium-block, a displacement of 659 cc, and incorporates a DOHC cylinder head with MIVEC variable valve timing and an intercooled turbocharger."

Very technical, I agree, but better than it was (engine specs were moved from this paragraph to the table further down). Further, in a single sentence I have eleven wikilinks for pretty much every technical term there. And since the article is not about cylinder heads, variable valve timing or turbochargers, I don't want to be seen padding out the page with content identical to that available at the click of a link.

• "MacPherson struts are used in the front suspension, and an unusual three-link De Dion tube/Watt's linkage is used in the rear.^[6] Front discs with anti-lock braking (ABS) and electronic brakeforce distribution (EBD) are standard across the range.^[15] In common with many other mid- or rear-engined vehicles its fifteen inch wheels have uneven-sized tires, 145/65 on the fronts and wider 175/55 on the rears, in an effort to minimise the chances of oversteer caused by the rear-biased weight distribution.^[9]"

Another eight wikilinks and three external references for technical terms under the subsection heading "Suspension, brakes and tires", which helps explain what these terms are in regard to.

Beyond that one section, approprately titled "Technical details", I don't see jargon brimming over, and made a conscious effort to avoid it. User:SteveBaker, the author of the featured articles Mini and Mini Moke has explicitly opined even before the most recent improvements that the article was of FA quality.[1] And my recent discussions on the talk page are with a user who has worked on previous featured articles. I felt a lot of progress was being made, and for you to step in and simply fail the article in the middle of these discussions seemed a bit curt and lacking in courtesy to me.

I agree that articles shouldn't be too technical, but there's a fine line to be drawn between explaining all technical jargon to a non-technical reader, and rendering an article unreadable by following every sentence with "what I mean is..." I'm trying to avoid ignoring the benefit of wikilinking and talking down to the reader on the assumption that he/she knows nothing. Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible states "Do not "dumb-down" the article in order to make it more accessible. Accessibility is intended to be an improvement to the article for the benefit of the less-knowledgeable readers (who may be the largest audience), without reducing the value to more technical readers." Which brings us full circle. I'm quite happy to take on board constructive criticism and specific suggestions, but if all you're going to do is fail the article as a GA when it seems to have similar amounts of "jargon" to recently passed FA articles, then I won't be making changes. I think I should be judged on the same standards as others. --DeLarge 10:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Y Done - article passed as a GA; please accept my apologies - my judgement was, in this case, clouded and I perceived an excellent article to be sub-standard. anthonycfc ^[talk] 14:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser

Initially, the checkuser deemed them all "confirmed", and then I just noticed that several days after the blocks, he stated "no comment" for the IPs. — Deckiller 15:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I assume that's grounds for an immediate unblocking? anthonycfc ^[talk] 15:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately yes, although the sockpuppeting is obvious. I guess the IPs might have a chance of being shared. — Deckiller 15:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree - it would seem like a technicality that they got off on, although that "technicality" may have been the WMF Privacy Policy that prevented the CheckUser commenting :) regards, anthonycfc ^[talk] 15:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email

I replied, and yay for both of us being Checkuser clerks! ~ Arjun 15:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It's a great experience, CheckUser clerking, isn't it! I've replied.. anthonycfc ^[talk] 15:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You've got assignments

I've added some assignments to your section at the VC. Enjoy. The Transhumanist   16:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the template! anthonycfc ^[talk] 16:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keeping in touch

Hello. Everything's alright, I hope that you've been having a good time both on and off wiki. :-) Regards, Húsönd 17:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! See you around :) anthonycfc ^[talk] 17:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your brief comment(!)

Hey, thanks for your brief note about becoming an admin. I'm deeply flattered you would like to nominate me such a position but I feel it only proper that, in case you weren't aware, I failed just two months ago, you can read the gory details here. I was under my old pseudonym of Budgiekiller which, itself, was deemed unbecoming of an admin, despite its origins come from my support of some dubious club from Suffolk and therefore my inherent opposition to some even more dubious club in Norfolk! To the point, I'd love to serve WP in a greater capacity but the events of a couple of months back make it clear that the community don't support me to the degree I would like. Perhaps in a couple of months time... Anyhow, thanks for your clear indication of support, let me know if there's anything I can do for you! All the best... The Rambling Man 20:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Great; thanks for your reply. anthonycfc ^[talk] 20:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] VC

You've got a new assignment at the VC. The Transhumanist   21:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Dealt with! anthonycfc ^[talk] 18:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

As noted above, I archive obsessively and at irregular intervals. The latest archive can be found at the bottom of the Archive Map, with a menu located at the top to navigate back to earlier archives. To restore conversations to the archive, edit the section in the archive, copy everything in the section, then edit this page and post the entire section to the bottom. Leave an edit summary of "restoring conversation from archive X" and save.

[edit] User talk:82.45.40.51

Of course. I'll wander on back in a few minutes and delete it again, once their attention span has gone past. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I added {{sprotected}} to it in the meanwhile. anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CFD 06/03/07 - Category:ASEAN

Re your strikethrough of User:132.205.44.134's vote. I'm afraid that you are mistaken, anonymous votes are permitted, although they (as indeed can 'logged-in' votes) may be discounted by the closing admin if circumstances dictate. cf. WP:CFD#Users without accounts and users with new accounts. I have reinstated the comment.

Xdamr^talk 23:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem; I'll bear that in mind - I'm not actually sure why I thought that :) anyway, thanks for bringing it to my attention. anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Antisemitic canards

When you close a CfD discussion as keep or no consensus, you have to remove the substed template from the category. Otherwise it leaves a mess for others to find and cleanup. Thanks. Vegaswikian 00:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Good morning; I'm not entirely sure what you mean by remove the subst't template - would you mind showing me? This is rather new too me, and I'd like to make sure I'm not leaving a trail of destruction behind :) anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Fox Broadcasting Company personalities

When you close a CfD as delete, it should be listed on Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Working for the bots to do the cleanup or so someone else can do the work knowing the result. Vegaswikian 01:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Good morning; I did initially try that, but found the page extremely confusing to use. Did my merge and re-categorisation with AWB, then request for speedy-deletion of the article not work? anthonycfc ^[talk] 07:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CFD

Anthony, you can see the steps in this series of diffs.

1. A keep or no consensus close.
   1. Close CFD like this. Note that the "cfd top" goes just below the section title rather than above it.
   2. For each nominated category, remove the CFD stuff from the category page.
   3. For each nominated category, add a cfdend tag to the category talk page, looks like this. The cfdend template is a bit of a nightmare. {{cfdend[|the name of the section at CFD only if it isn't the same as the category name]|date=2007 Never 12[|result=no consensus/merge this isn't needed for keep as that's the default]}}.
2. A delete close where you don't empty the category yourself.
   1. Close CFD as previous.
   2. Add the entry to WP:CFD/W in the "Empty then delete" section like this.
3. A delete close where you do empty the category yourself or where it is already empty.
   1. Close CFD as previous.
   2. Empty the category
   3. Add the entry to WP:CFD/W in the "Ready for deletion" section like this.

Merge is just same as delete, only it goes in the Merge/Rename section like this. When/if empty, it goes in the Ready to delete section. If you have a look through my recent edits to CFD/W, categories and category talk, there should be examples of every sort of close in there. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Either/Or GA Nom

Hi Anthony. Got the suggestions for improvement regarding the Either/Or GA Nom. As per your suggestions regarding, well-referenced and images; I have added references to the opening paragraph and I have aligned the tables and images together in a nested table. I'd appreciate a re-evaluation of the GA nomination and any suggestions to further improve. Thank you for your review! Poor Yorick 13:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BLEU GA Nom

Hi, could you be more specific in your complaint about the "Jargon" quality of the article? I'm not sure what kind of image would be included, but I'll think about it. Any suggestions would be welcome. - Francis Tyers · 16:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA template

Apart from the width issue, which I tried to fix (revert me if you don't like others to edit your userspace), you probably don't want Talk:InterCityExpress to claim that you rated it on June 9, but on March 11. An easy way to make your template do that would be to subst the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} and {{CURRENTDAY}} magic words. Happy editing, Kusma (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey; I'll have a look at the GA Template, but I always AGF so thanks very much in advance! I was sure that I subst'd the template, but if I never, my apologies - I'll be sure to do so in future!

Thanks a lot for your advice and edits!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 17:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Red links

Hi, Anthony! I would like to ask you to please never remove the red links from disambiguation pages as you did here. First, there is nothing wrong with a disambiguation page having red links, as long as those links lead to valid encyclopedic topics, articles on which should (and will) be created eventually (see WP:MOSDAB#Redlinks for details). Second, these red links produce backlink references (example), which are an extremely useful tool and are vital in setting disambiguation schemes for ambiguous names. Thank you for understanding!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Good evening! Thanks for the heads up; I did have a nasty habit of doing that a while ago :) I've since learned my lesson from the community, and I am striving to adapt all advice given to me in my edits. I'll be sure to do the same for yours!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 18:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Userpage

Hey Anthony! I was just wondering if you could do a revamp of my userpage and talk page? They just look a bit messy and I would like a simpler design (without loads of gaps) that looks more professional! If you haven't got time I fully understand, cheers Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Just as a followup to that, I'd like to keep all the content on my userpage, and maybe put the {{admin}} userbox on it (but thats the only userbox I want!) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd love too! I'll draw something up in my sandbox, hopefully within the hour. Are you looking for a sort of minimalist look (such as mine and Arjun's) something elaborate (such as The Transhumanist's) or do you have something else in mind?

Regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 18:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Either, or! They both look good to me! Theres not loads of text, but at the minute, theres a lot of space. To be honest - its entirely upto you, because anything will be better than it is at the minute! Would quite like the log of my blocks, deletions like Arjun's if possible. Thanks so much for this, its really appreciated Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay then; I've got something in mind, I'll whip it up soon. Arjun's is basically a template of my userpage - except he uses the {{admin}} template, as oppose to {{user6}}. However, I've got something more graphical in mind... anthonycfc ^[talk] 20:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm getting excited now :) Let your imagination run wild. By all means take as long as you want with it as well Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BabyDweezil

Your WP:ADOPT summary states that you help out in dispute resolution. If you're ready for a challenging assignment you may want to touch base with BabyDweezil. This editor requested adoption several days ago but has not yet gotten a mentor and is restricted from posting direct solicitations to adopters' user pages due to a community ban. BabyDweezil has appealed the ban to ArbCom at WP:RFAR#Request_to_review_indefinite_block_of_User:BabyDweezil and at this time the Committee is 6-3 in favor of hearing the case.

I supported the community ban, noted that BabyDweezil raises some legitimate issues in the appeal request, and recommended that this editor seek a mentor. Now I am posting to several mentors who specialize in dispute resolution and are willing to take on adoptees in the hope that one of you can help this user. Regards, Durova^Charge! 02:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Good afternoon (GMT time); thank you for contacting me. Regretfully, I will have to decline the oppurtunity at this time. I currently have four charges, as well as numerous other responsibilities, and I'm a bit overloaded off-Wiki at the moment. I prefer to devote a lot of time to my adoptees, and taking on another isn't really an option under my present circumstances. If the Adopters summary misleaded you into my status being accepting, please accept my apologies for not updating it. I am always available for informal assistance or advice via my talk page or via email at any time, and the user is more than welcome to contact me at any time.

Kindest regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 14:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)