User talk:Mjroots/Archive/Them

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Contents

Re: Airfrance353

They surely have to be the same person. User:Airfrance353 created Air France 358 - the same page User:Aircanada001 made. I then viewed Aircanada001's contribs and came across Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of AirFrance358. Now I'm not too familiar with this vandal, but this will probably be resolved at this checkuser case. Spellcast (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Alliant

Hi. When a user blanks a page they've created themselves, we should interpret that as a request for deletion under the CSD guidelines. He wasn't exactly removing the {{db}} tag so much as accepting the removal of the page. There really isn't a necessity to warn him for vandalism. Thanks, Sam Korn (smoddy) 21:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Indeed it is gone. Sam Korn (smoddy) 22:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


New pages

Exactly and don't think for one moment I didn't think of the new page patrollers. Please please visit User talk:Kingturtle and inform him that flagging articles created by me as patrolled would be of enormous benefit to new page patrollers and save them a lot of unnecessary work. I find it ridiculous that being the creator of the most articles on wikipedia than anybody I can't be granted automatically patrolled pages when an admin of 1/10th of my edits can. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ $1,000,000? 14:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Note - Check unpatrolled pages here

If you would rather not have to check each one I really think you ought to spare two minutes and see the discussion here to get my account natrually marked as patrolled. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ $1,000,000? 17:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I do a lot of work across wikipedia and create articles, most of them are fuller than this on a large range of subjects. The easiest thing would be to have my account flagged ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ $1,000,000? 17:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Done 400, that's enough, I've got cramp. When he starts on China, count me out. I'll go back to New Pages and see what horrors have been exposed by the receding tide. JohnCD (talk) 18:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


Well small price to pay after your magnificent help at patrolling my stubs I think the cats are just about right. INteresting that I started List of shipwrecks in the Bristol Channel not so long ago. Where I live there was tons of them as Cardiff and Barry were once the largest coal exporting ports in the world. I don't know what happened earlier but my user page was tagged twice for speedy deletion , I thought I was speaking to a blatant vandal and then the next thing you know this persistent admin keeps hounding and interfering and making out like I;m rude and that and am the bad guy. Well SPECTRE No.1 isn't a saint is he after all his crimes against humanity. Lol Regards amigo ♦ King of Baldness ♦ $1,000,000? 23:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally it's funny John above mentioned China I started the 900 odd Tibet articles a while back ♦ King of Baldness ♦ $1,000,000? 23:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Radhaa Ki Betiyaan Kuch Kar Dikhayengi

I've saw this earlier art puzzled over it. Googling it established that it's a major new Indian TV series. I've added a ref and an explanation and the {{db-repost}} tag. I'll try and establish its notability a bit more clearly shortly. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the message. Sorry to add to the confusion but I missed out a word: I "removed" the {{db-repost}}. Anyhow. I've added a couple of cites and taken out the synoposis which looks like a copy-vio anyway!? Having done that, I still have my doubts about notability :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, you're probably right though the first deletion was as {{db-bio}} which it isn't. It doesn't assert notability and I can't find any non-trivial coverage. First episode screens tonight apparently. thanks for your input. Much appreciated. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
In fact, it isn't {{db-nn}} at all as that applies primarily to people and organisations and not to their output or products. I was so focused on notability that I completely lost sight of this earlier. Oh well, we're all human, I suppose :) All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 12:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have been reviewing Pvsamrat (talk · contribs)'s edits. I deleted Raajkumar Aaryyan and Ek Packet Umeed because they were copyvio of www.ndtvimagine.com. However, Radhaa Ki Betiyaan Kuch Kar Dikhayengi is not speedyable. db-repost only applies to articles that when through a regular AfD. Articles that were proded, or speedied can be recreated. The first version of the article never stated that it was a show, and appeared to be talking about a person in the film, not the film itself. It probably should have been speedy as having no context. Nevertheless there is no problem with recreating speedied material. Sometimes the subject is notable, but the person just hasn't stated how. When s/he recreates it in a better fashion it can be kept.
If you think the article should be deleted you can pursue an AfD. Films and books are not speediable for lacking notability. Jon513 (talk) 12:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Cat picture

Have you considered an article RFC over that? It definitely wasn't clear-cut vandalism, so I removed it from AIV. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Definitely. Daniel Case (talk) 19:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It isn't vandalism though (see Wikipedia:Vandalism for a definition) and doesn't require a block. Hut 8.5 20:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Possible edit war

Thanks for the note. It seems to have calmed down now. I will try to keep an eye on it. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)