User talk:Pigman/Archive 4

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

Dylan Trenton

You beat me to the punch there. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 03:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

  • (reply) I was wibbling over whether it was too late to include it in the AFD :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 04:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast

Hi, please keep in mind that current consensus on A7 is to limit it only to people, corps, groups, bands, ... Usually non notable songs are redirected to the album containing them, per WP:ALBUM. -- lucasbfr talk 18:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Yeah A7 is pretty slippery atm, an other admin might have deleted them :) -- lucasbfr talk 19:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Pablo Pérez Companc

Hey. Any editor other than the author of the page can decline a speedy deletion by removing the tag. {{hangon}} is just a way for article creators to contest a speedy. However, I should have provided some kind of reasoning instead of using admin rollback, but I was busy at the time so I just wanted the tag gone quick and easy. I planned to drop you a message later, but I forgot about it when I noticed the GFDL problem. Note that A7 only applies to articles that contain no assertion of notability of any kind. Being a professional (motor)sportsman is an assertion of notability, as is being a driver for Chip Ganassi Racing, competing in Indy Pro Series and the reference in the article. You are of course free to take the article to AFD, but it would be a waste of time because current consensus is that professional and top-level amateur sportsmen are notable. A quick Google search also shows that this person has been the subject of multiple non-trivial coverage. Thanks, Prolog 19:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I mainly had WP:BIO in mind (see the short section on "athletes"). I haven't even read through WP:SPORT, because I think it just looks too huge and creepy to ever gain consensus. Usually professional sportspersons (competing at high-level) have coverage in reliable sources, so verifiability is not a problem. You got me thinking though; I can't remember a single AFD on a driver competing in a notable racing series. The closest thing I can think of is this. Maybe the best way to describe the community's current stance on this is the lack of AFD's on sportspersons (except for all those non-notable wrestlers). Anyway, don't let my opinion to stop you from doing what you think is best. Prolog 15:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Little Angels (TV series) etc

I note that you put speedy tags on Little Angels (TV series) and various related articles. Though it's far from my cuppa, the series was actually nominated for a Bafta, and has received a fair amount of media coverage (eg see the smattering of references I've added to the article). If you still consider it non-notable, please take it to AfD. Regards, Espresso Addict 09:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

No worries -- it's often hard to discern the wheat among the abundance of chaff! Cheers, Espresso Addict 18:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Adam Ropp

Yeah, I'm not convinced he entirely meets WP:Notable, but the article was such a sorry mess by a newbie (possibly a "good friend" or himself), that I felt compelled to fix it and !vote. We'll see. Bearian 17:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

you're doing ok

except, perhaps, you have been going a little too fast. Suggestion: after patrolling for a while, do some editing as a break. in fact, some of those articles you had tagged turned out to be quite interesting--following them up led to a very COI editor, apparently putting in at least a dozen related articles over a good while with much public relations talk (and copying a good deal of some of them from web sites). I think, in fact, it was someone doing it commercially. Nobody seems to have really noticed them up to now. Anyway, I'm onto the problem, and the articles will get fixed and the copyvio removed and the notable ones saved and the editor either educated or blocked. There's a surprising amount of this--Durova set up a special page [[WP:BFAQ]] to refer such people to. If you see anything similar, please let me or her know or post it at the COI noticeboard. You not bad at all (smile)--your instinct was good that something was wrong. DGG (talk) 05:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC) (sorry:Business FAQ=WP:BFAQ.)

Vandal!

(removal of text moved to user subpage) - Good thing you use edit summaries. When I saw that huge, red number, I was ready to revert you for vandalism. Almost did, just to be "funny". But I spare you my sick sense of humour. SKREEEEEE! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 18:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Phil Swern

Hi Pigman. I've declined the speedy deletion of the above as the article did assert notability. A quick Google test also shows he is (vaguely) notable. However if you'd like to put it to WP:AFD no worries. Best. Pedro :  Chat  10:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

No problems. CSD is a minefield but editors trying to keep it accurate on tagging really helps. You're doing some great work here and it really is appreciated. Pedro :  Chat  19:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Clearly erroneous A7

Simon Caney. If you know the thicket of notability guidelines, you'll know "professor" means a lot more in the UK than in the US and is an assertion of notability in itself. The speedy criteria are hard and don't stretch - please take more care with these. (This is becoming a matter of public concern and PR problems, so a few people are looking at all CSDs and particularly A7s lately.) Thanks! - David Gerard 16:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Responded far too extensively on user's talk page here. Pigman 18:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

How can I save Wires On Fire Wiki?

I saw that you nominated the Wires On Fire Wiki for deletion...is there anything I can do to save it? I'm a big fan of these L.A. kids! —Preceding unsigned comment added by PsychedelicJudaism (talk • contribs) 04:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

I've found (and added) a few articles that should settle any problems with verification for the Wires On Fire Wiki. If you have a moment, and feel like checking it out, I'd be appreciative. Thanks. PsychedelicJudaism 07:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Very nice touch

Feel free to do so! I just hope he actually does continue to work on the article - when I first saw it, it looked almost like a db-spam candidate, and it hasn't been edited since. Thanks for the note! Hersfold (t/a/c) 13:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Min Article

You left no reason as to why the Min article I recently wrote is up for deletion. Stating the reason would make my job a lot easier in editing the page to fit Wikipedia's standards. Thank you for your time. --Darkxxangel 15:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Min article

If the reason you believe the article is not notable is because Min has not released anything as of yet(if you actually did read the article, you would see her first single is released November 1st), then you should delete Esmée Denters' wikipedia as well. She hasn't released an album or single yet and her article is all 'buzz' as you call it, though her page is not up for deletion. I don't see the fairness in that at all. --Darkxxangel 16:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info!

I've been fixing typos for a while, but I guess I really should read up on how things are done, before I try anything substantive.... Thanks again! --Marjaliisa 23:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Real Journeys

Hi Pigman. I see you originally requested for this above article to be speedily deleted. Can you please make sure that you check the history (or at least recent history) before you make such requests? Somebody miffed up a page merge, and therefore wiped out a perfectly notable article. See the version where I had clearly established notability [1]. Sometime later somebody did the incorrect merge, and less than a day later, you asked for a speedy deletion. If this hadn't been stopped, I would now have to request an undeletion. Ingolfson 00:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Mmmh, maybe you placed the speedy on Milford Sound Flightseeing instead, and that carried the speedy tag over with the incorrect merge with Real Journeys? In that case, apologies, not your fault. Ingolfson 00:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit request for FAC

Hi there. I was wondering if you could take the time to copyedit Lethbridge. It is a FAC and most of the complaints now are regarding copyediting. I've done the best I can, but I've been staring at this article for so long, my head is spinning. Thank you very much for your consideration. :) --Kmsiever 16:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Email

You have one sir! Ryan Postlethwaite 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AbattoirBluesTour.png

Thanks for uploading Image:AbattoirBluesTour.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 13:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Why respond to a bot? Dunno. Just 'cause I feel like it. When I originally uploaded it, it seemed like a lo-res 200x200 pixel image of the CD cover would be acceptable. Like a kid, I thought "All the other cool album articles are doing it, it must be OK..." Thus I fell into the trap I am constantly telling others not to do: Look at policy, not at other articles, for guidance because other stuff exists on Wikipedia. I'm a lot clearer on Wikipedia's fair use policy now. So I went and put the image up for deletion when this issue came up. It's gone now. And I no longer have a copyright outlaw price on my head. Of course, one reason I was confused is because WP's fair use policy has tightened up since some of those other album covers were uploaded. Pigman 00:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Glad to see you are back in the game. --Mattisse 23:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Somehow I got the idea you wanted to be an admin. Do you? --Mattisse 01:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

My (KWSN's) RFA

Thank you for supporting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Prod Template

Prod stands for "proposed deletion". The policy is at Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion. The template is Template:Prod. Anyone can use it, not just admins. It's a good way to spur discussion or try to reach consensus prior to an AfD, although, IMO, articles that should be speedied or are clear deletion candidates should still go straight to AfD. --SesameballTalk 18:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pigman

Ryan Postlethwaite would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Ryan Postlethwaite to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pigman. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

I know it's a day earlier than you suggested, but I was bored! :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 22:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

My RFA
Thanks for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successful. I'll do my best to justify the confidence you've placed in me! Dppowell 23:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Just delete it, it was a test page

Just delete it, it was a test page. user:1oftheseppl 1oftheseppl 02:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to Copybull. Thanks for letting me know. Pigmanwhat?/trail 02:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Click "show" to see my message.

Do it

You are a good guy. Mattisse 15:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support with respect to my request for adminship, which successfully closed today with a count of 47 support, 1 oppose. If you ever see me doing anything that makes you less than pleased that you supported my request, I hope to hear about it from you. See you around Wikipedia! Accounting4Taste 05:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Dennis Wayne Hall Article (LMA2007 23:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC))

Hello,

Recently you have suggested editing to the Dennis Wayne Hall article. Can you please assist me? How can I make this article better? LMA2007 23:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Religious youth group

What group? I was a delegate for the Regional Cabinet for Youth Works when I was in high school. Lara❤Love 19:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GlassCobra's RfA

My RFA
Hey Pigman! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I also wanted to wish you luck in your RfA, and I expect to see you join the admin ranks in a few days! I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any backup! Let's go whack some vandals! GlassCobra 01:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

User:RC-0722

Hey buddy, thanks for welcoming this guy for me. :) He wasn't blocked or anything though; he reverted some vandalism on Marvin Harrison, so I dropped him a line to say thanks and to ask if he wanted to create an account. The rest, as they say, is history. GlassCobra 03:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Heh, it's cool. Don't lose any sleep over it. :) GlassCobra 05:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA which unfortunately did not pass at (47/23/5). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait till someone nominates me next time. Have a great day(or night)! --Hdt83 Chat 05:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Henrik's RfA thanks!

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. Good luck with your own RfA! henrik•talk 18:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you bunches!

Image:Admin mop.PNG Thank you so much for suppporting my RfA. I was promoted with a total of (44/1/0) - a vote of confidence from the community that I find humbling and motivating. I will not abuse your trust. Look forward to working with you! (Esprit15d 21:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC))

Thank you for your support.

Guy Fawkes Remember, remember, the fifth of November?
Thank you to everyone who participated in my Request for adminship, which was successful at 50/5/0 on November 5th, 2007.
It became, as you may know, rather contentious toward the end (though fortunately no gunpowder was involved), and I appreciate the work of other Wikipedians to keep it focused. --Thespian 02:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!!

Get to it! :)
Get to it! :)

... you're an admin!! Well done indeed :) Welcome to the mayhem that is adminship & don't forget, if you need anything, just give me a shout ;) - Alison ❤ 04:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations as well! --SesameballTalk 04:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

You're an Admin!

Congratulations! It ain't official until the button is pushed, and I pushed it! Good Luck and Do Right. Cheers, Cecropia 04:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The admins' T-shirt. User:Accounting4Taste 22:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
The admins' T-shirt. User:Accounting4Taste 22:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I'm glad you passed! I got the T-shirt and this very useful link from User:Acalamari when I passed. Welcome aboard! Accounting4Taste 04:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The true image:

Enjoy your mop, but beware industrial solvents. Keegantalk 05:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Enjoy your mop, but beware industrial solvents. Keegantalk 05:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Congratulations Oink!.. :-) Carlossuarez46 05:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Congrats! Now go get a good nights sleep and get to work! ;) Lara❤Love 05:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

Good job becoming an admin! Your RfA thank you was probably the funniest one I've ever read, and if I could, I'd nominate you all over again just for that. If you mess up though, you can look forward to a little of this...

Haha. Good luck! :P GlassCobra 06:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Where's the finger food and coffee? GlassCobra 06:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
How about a slice of ham? bibliomaniac15 A straw poll on straw polls 06:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
How about a slice of ham? bibliomaniac15 A straw poll on straw polls 06:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations mate, well deserved. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem

Anyone who uses the word "foppish" is alright in my book. Good luck! Neil ☎ 13:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:JollySwine2.png

Regardless of what you say, this image is not available under the GFDL, as it incorporates the Wikipedia logo, which the Wikimedia Foundation has explicitly not released under the GFDL or any other free license. At best, those parts of the image that do not include the logo are available under the GFDL, but the entire image most definitely is not. Wikipedia's media use policy does not recognize the concept of fair use, nor of parody, outside of the article namespace – which is why non-free images may not be used there. I have updated the license tag accordingly. Thanks – Gurch 07:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

You know, I knew I was going to make a mistake with the licensing on Image:JollySwine2.png due to ignorance and damned if I didn't. Thanks for the correction.
I certainly don't intend to press the matter and admit I'm not a professional in the field of copyright but my understanding is that the incorporation of a logo (like the WP globe) into a graphic which uses the image to make a political statement or parody-like commentary on the original image is not only legal but protected speech. I can't name the Supreme Court cases offhand but I know things like this have gone that far and been decided in favor of the usage. While such a use loosely falls under the "fair use" umbrella, because of the critical (as in "criticism") nature of the context of the graphic as a whole, it actually falls more under First Amendment protection. This is a fairly narrow and specific part of legal precedent and case law on copyrights. This is my understanding of the issues inherent in the image I created but I do not claim 100% certainty in the matter.
Ahem, however, all that said and as a new carrier of a mop and bucket here, I would be glad to remove the image from Wikipedia if you or anyone at the Wikimedia Foundation thought it a problem. It isn't my intent to (what's it called?) degrade the value of the copyright holders' image or to be contentious or argumentative. (As an aside, if you have a better understanding these issues, I'd love to be pointed at relevant info.)
Anyway, it's mostly moot since I really only wanted to use it for my RfA thanks note. It's main use done, I'd be happy to remove it from Wikipedia immediately if there are problems with it. Also, protected free speech elsewhere is one thing, but there's nothing that says Wikipedia must host such speech on its servers or under its auspices. (I do ramble on, don't I?) Cheers, Pigmanwhat?/trail 23:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry, there's no need to remove it. I'll see if I can explain more clearly.
Use of the Wikipedia logo is (of course) permitted within Wikipedia -- we would be rather stuck if it wasn't. It's just incorrect to assert that it's available under the GFDL, and thus wrong to tag it as such. Of course fair use of the logo is perfectly legal, which is why you see it in news articles on websites and the like. However, Wikipedia doesn't allow fair use of content internally, outside of articles -- we have enough problems just getting fair use rationales for article images sorted out, so we (or rather the Foudnation) have decided to prohibit non-free content on non-article pages, Foundation-copyrighted logos obviously being an exception to that. Derivative works of images are, generally, subject to the same restrictions as the original images (except for those under "no derivatives" licenses, for which they aren't allowed at all, but neither Wikipedia nor Commons accepts images with such licenses. Free speech, the first amendment and what have you don't come into this, since it's just an internal media use policy. So to summarize, using it is fine, but the tag (and your statement that it was under the GFDL) were previously incorrect, and now fixed. That's all. Sorry to bother you. Thanks – Gurch 00:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification, Gurch. I note that I eventually, sort of logically, came to the policy in the last line of my message above although I didn't know actually know the specifics of it. And please, it's not a bother to me for you to clarify the licensing issues involved. I admit I'm sometimes a little unclear on the intricacies but I'm trying to learn. For me, probably like many other editors, image copyright is sometimes difficult to grasp in all details. Straightforward copyright issues, yes, I get them, but the line on fair use at WP has moved over the last two years and sometimes I realize I'm on the wrong side of current policy. So thanks again. Pigmanwhat?/trail 01:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

To the Pigman from the Bearian man

Congrats. Now where's my exotic coffee and snack? Best of luck, and remember to say you're sorry when you screw up. Bearian 14:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S.
Wield me!
Wield me!
Bearian 14:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Fortunately "sorry" is very much a part of my vocabulary. Even when I disagree with people, it's almost always in the most courteous words I can muster. Sturm und drang isn't really my style. As for the snack, I'm afraid I've had to rely on potluck for this little gathering. Plus that offer only related to challenges to my graphic. Gurch was really the only one who managed to fit into the offer conditions and, sadly, I still haven't offered him anything. I really should since he kindly explained a point of policy to me. And all I have is chicory coffee a la New Orleans style, currently considered a gourmet coffee but which started as a poverty way of extending the life of the coffee beans you had. Chicory was cheap. Pigmanwhat?/trail 01:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed

Image:Admin_mop.PNG As long as you're collecting these. Good show!

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Grats :) - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 19:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

About your RfA

Congratulations on passing your RfA! I was going to give you a T-shirt, and a link to the new admins' school, but it seems you already have them! :) Best wishes. Acalamari 19:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congratulations on passing. This is one pig that can fly! ;) Spellcast 22:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

I didn't know you were running for admin or I would have voted for you, definitely. I know you are honorable and trustworthy. I wish I could have registered my vote. Mattisse 18:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

"Hammy Fists"

Hey PigMan. I just had to share this diff with you :) - Alison ❤ 07:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Answer

re.[2] - it's further down the page. I put it there minutes after you were sysopped in a moment of wanton vandalism :) - Alison ❤ 07:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Heh,"sysopped in a moment of wanton vandalism." Heee. Drive-by Pigman Admin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kathryn NicDhàna (talk • contribs) 22:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
And Alison's userbox addition was the one I was looking for too. Did I say thank you?. I swear I'll probably miss vandalism to my pages because I'm not paying attention. Pigmanwhat?/trail 22:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

AfD nomination of Katbite

An article that you have been involved in editing, Katbite, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katbite. Thank you. Optigan13 07:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

== Happy Halloween ==

Boo!

— Yeanold Viskersenn!!!)

 for you!

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks!
Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed with 54 supports, 2 opposes and 3 neutrals. Thanks for your support, I really appreciate it. I hope to exceed expectations, If you have any advice please feel free to let me know. Thanks again!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤

User:Pilotguy/Verifications

Can you register your nick on Freenode as outlined in this section? Once you do this, we will be able to add you to the access list. Thanks! :-) Cbrown1023 talk 21:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

organicgirl

Thanks for taking the time to provide comments.

I am still at a loss on how to proceed. I am not fully understanding the process of editorial decisions at Wikipedia, and am aware that you are very experienced. So, is the company information valid if I provide a newspaper article. I don't understand fully the logic of allowing some companies and products and not others. I guess I haven't been fully baptized into the Wiki Community of Practice.

monte

{x:

MonteShaffer 20:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. I believe in the goals of Wikipedia, and do understand the implications associated with determining notability, references, etc. I also understand the implications to prevent spam at Wikipedia, which makes your job as an editor even more difficult. This discussion has opened my eyes to a lot of issues you deal with on a daily basis. Like mentioned, the Whole Foods article is generally edited and maintained by someone at their company - in the print world, this would be no different than someone at Whole Foods calling up EB and asking how the article is going to be worded etc. [3]

Based on your feedback, I am going to rework the article. It still may not be considered notable at this time (or ever), which is your discretion (and can be respected); I actually was teaching an Internet Marketing class today where we discussed this issue in detail. So there is a lot of learning going on by me personally and by those I influence. In this Internet course, I am considering requiring the students to write an article about a business and try and get it approved through Wikipedia. The awareness issue is both good and bad. This would requiring them contact a company get key information, and write an article that fits the guidelines. I am attempting to model such behavior with organicgirl.

Indeed I was using my UserPage as a sandbox, and I did collect the information directly from the company.

I do realize the dilemna that may be created for you [Great, this guy is training students to exploit Wikipedia]. By no means is that my intention. It is clear that Wikipedia effects awareness. Managing a company's identity is important, that is why someone at Whole Foods monitors the page. I can hope you recognize that my goal is to learn from this activity and encourage my students to learn. All of my contributions I have made have been intended to contribute. I have strong "open source beliefs."

For example, I am a great grandson of Alexander Ruthven, who was killed on 5 Aug 1600 by King James of England, in the Gowrie house conspiracy. I also created a Web color tool [4] with categorical colors mentioned specifically in the Web colors Wiki page. I have one footnote in the article which links to the tool. As a future marketing professor, I am using that information almost as a metric on Information Diffusion.

There may be a fine line between tricking or gaming the system and using white magic within the system. My intentions are to teach techniques that fit under the latter, so I do appreciate the time you have devoted to increasing my awareness. If there was a central message you would want me to share with those I teach and influence, what would it be? Don't even try to create business articles? Or, if you try, please follow the following guidelines? I recognize the "bar is raised" but at the same time it is important to walk away with some learning points. I know businesses try to game the system, but I am looking for learning points about putting legitimate content about a company in this "encyclopedic mold"

In terms of copy strategy, please realize that I am trying to follow the rules. I have created two pages in the past, and was attempting to model organicgirl based on different specific pages (which I earlier mentioned). By no means am I trying to justify myself. As editors, you are deeply involved in many activities, so the copy strategy you use (e.g., encyclopedic writing) has become tacitly engrained in your way of thinking. Most learners learn informally, by copying good examples. I have read all of the suggested materials, and will continue to read, but we do learn best by doing. I am trying to understand and become a legitimate participant in your Community of Practice. A model example of good "encyclopedic copy" would be very helpful, especially in the context I am currently working on.

So I will work on a new version, and give it back to you [post it as my user page].

Thanks again for being so responsive, and helping me to understand. Editors have a challenging job, and the dilemma of providing appropriate content (valuable information for consumers of information) without allowing the promotional is a difficult balance indeed.


monte

{x: —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonteShaffer (talk • contribs) 02:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!

Hi, Pigman, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies!

We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful:

  • Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able.
  • Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
  • The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there.
  • If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics.
  • If you're planning to stay, have a square in our quilt! You can put anything you want in it.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome!

BTW, this has to be the best-formatted user page I've seen. Nicely done! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Neopaganism vs. neopaganism

I admit your move was arguable, but can we go slowly with this please? At present, we have Germanic neopaganism, Baltic neopaganism, Hellenic neopaganism, Slavic neopaganism, Finnish neopaganism -- and now Celtic Neopaganism. Could I ask you to revert the move, and ask for wider input on, for example, Talk:Neopaganism. To me, it appears that while "Neopaganism" may be capitalised as a simplex, it acts as a generic noun in the "$ETHNIC neopaganism" compound. I am not sure though: I am saying, can we look into this first, and start moving things around after? --dab (𒁳) 12:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

ok, looking into it, I find that I can agree with either spelling. Could you still (a) announce your intention to see if anyone else objects, and (b) move either none or all of the "$ETHNIC neopaganism" articles? regards, dab (𒁳) 13:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I've answered this on your talk page but I probably should have done it here. I'm not too consistent about keeping conversations in the same place. Sorry. Pigmanwhat?/trail 20:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

no problem. As I said, I have no objections to the move, except that if you move one, you should have moved all. To have Germanic neopaganism but Celtic Neopaganism is inconsistent. dab (𒁳) 07:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for taking care of that. I had deleted what I accidentally pasted, but then someone restored it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keepscases (talk • contribs) 18:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Mop!

Thank you for fixing my plethora of typos and that mistake on the publication year. Obviously I am a bit distracted, over-excited and over-tired today. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 12:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Hard Job for New Admin :-)

Got to you from editors assistance. I put up an RfC on relevant page couple days ago, but no response. The article is about the probably most hotly contested WIKI issue - Israel - so put on your battle gear :-) But seriously, I like you saying you want to protect wiki pedia, and I know that means both from people who may want to stick in well-sourced but possibly a bit less than NPOV info and, on the opposite end, people who will delete anything negative about Israel, no matter how NPOV, well-sourced, etc.

Which is the problem right now at Samson Option. There are at least 4 editors (at that page and also at nuclear weapons and Israel) who think Samson Option needs its own article. Among ourselves we might wrangle over what goes in and what doesn't, point by point, in a civil manner.

The problem is User:Tewfik who has declared the article should be merged into nuclear weapons and Israel - in part because of lack of content - yet he repeatedly has MASS deleted content put up, mostly by me. He even deletes info and then puts up NEED CITATION! I think the other people are afraid to add anything now. Even I've gotten afraid to add the most sourced and UN-controversial material because he's always got a new excuse for deleting it - even when he himself has requested it. (There is one editor who keeps reading the article AFTER he's deleted content and then on Talk agrees it should be deleted because of lack of content!)

User:Tewfik has inferred he SOON will preemptorily merge Samson Option into nuclear weapons and Israel. This also would delete all records of his bad behavior on this page.

I'm trying to keep my temper. I've complained on his talk page a couple times and put up the RfC. I'm not sure if this qualifies as a 2 editor conflict per Mediation Cabal - plus I confess I've been a bit sarcastic and dubious of his good faith intentions. If he merges the articles the debate will start all over again and he'll probably pull the same numbers.

Anyway, at this point there is now an article about the The Samson Option (book) that some of the relevant info can get put in and lots of other non-WIKI venues I'm working on. But it just riles me that an editor can be so capricious and intimidate everyone like this.

So feel free to do whatever you do best in these circumstances :-) Any input you want to have on Talk:Samson Option appreciated. Carol Moore 15:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)User:Carolmooredc User talk:Carolmooredc

Comparison of database tools

Hi, just wanted to give a heads up that Anas2048 immediately recreated Comparison of database tools after it was just deleted per the AfD. Collectonian (talk) 00:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review: Mary G Peterson Elementary School

see: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 24 — I am bringing my own closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary G Peterson Elementary School (2nd nomination) to DRV because the inconsistency between my no-consensus closure and you delete closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myrtle E. Huff Elementary School is not pretty nor confidence building. I think it would be useful for you as the admin closing the AFD that I'm comparison-referencing in this DRF to provide input to the discussion. Thanks. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

article delete

hi, you deleted my article "Comparison of database tools" it's not finiched i write it now , give me one hour to finiched it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anas2048 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Responded sort of on the user's talk page. Pigman☿ 01:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
And by e-mail when contacted. Pigman☿ 18:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Dbiel

YEANOLD you should be told user Dbiel is using mis information about article STUDENT to get his own way he is claims the debate was resolved and decided the image was not allowed use in the article this IS 100% UN TRUE!!

I looked at all point made by each side and has made me very angry a good argument is ignored so someone gets their way - this is wrong on all levels!

you should need to resolve this incident at once —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.138.19 (talk) 18:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Article Student and image Student japes.jpg

In reply to your posting of "Um, Dbiel, could you give me a clue about what this is about? I'd appreciate it" on User talk:Yeanold Viskersenn; this was posted by an unregistered user (talk) who appears to be very new to Wikipedia and failed to create a new heading or even sign the post. He also posted to my talk page User talk:Dbiel#STUDENT. If you would like to join into the old and extensive discussion of the use of Image:Student japes.jpg in article Student, your input would be most welcome. Dbiel (Talk) 20:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Comparison of database tools

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Comparison of database tools. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.--Anas2048 (talk) 20:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

You have been nominated for deletion

User:R/EFD/Nomination - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Why, this is such a surprise! I'm honored to accept this... hey, wait, I'm what? Deletion, you say? Is this some sort of Orwellian thing? You can't just erase people! People are needed to make Soylent Green! I'll fight I tell you. Pigman☿ 03:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Official thanks, slightly delayed due to post-RfA crash (who knew?)

Tapadh Leibh (Thank You)...

Talk page

Hi - I'm sorry - it appears that you may have received numerous messages that were designated for my talk page. This is due to me having lazily copied code from your talk page to mine, specifically the "leave a new message section". I'll fix the issue now, and once again, can only apologise for any inconvenience or confusion caused. Thanks for your understanding. Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 06:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very match, for your help. "un grand merci pour vous".--Anas2048 (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

RE : Looking for a bit of help

Try CloseAFD. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo (talk) 11:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Margareta Svensson

FYI- I got the same message as you about this and I've replied to the user (see here). Obviously feel free to leave your comments, but I thought I'd let you know. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Your comments -- admin for recall

I believe any outcome from this RfC should be more than stern words. I believe this RfC embodies a longstanding and continuing community grievance with dab's attitude and the result should be more than a slap on the wrist. I have no wish to censure or castigate Dbachmann, an editor with many good qualities and contributions to Wikipedia, but I would gently suggest the following: That Dbachmann take a wikibreak and seriously re-evaluate his relationship to the project and in particular his relationship and attitude toward other good faith editors.

I admit I am rather appalled at this, especially your apparent reference to this as a valid "grievance" (as opposed to the thinly veiled bullying it was - have you actually reviewed the case?). Still, I draw your attention to that fact that I am "open to recall", under the conditions I phrased as follows:
I am open to recall upon the request of six editors in good standing. "good standing" shall mean 500 mainspace edits excluding revert-warring * and* a block log clean of recent blocks for blatant abuse or trolling. I will be prepared to re-apply on the suggestion of a * single* editor whom I recognize :as a valuable and sane contributor.
Of the editors endorsing your complaints against me, I certainly consider you and Kathryn editors in good standing, besides, surely, Wobble and Addhoc. So, to live up to my promises: if either of you seriously thinks that I should not be a Wikipedia admin, I will agree to suspend my adminship and re-apply at RfA. Since none of the accusations against me involve actual use of admin privileges, I would find it difficult to appreciate the grounds for such a request, but I will honour it regardless. I might add that I recognize that it is possible to be of different minds regarding my approach to debates. But it is hardly possible to dispute that the articles I do address end up being improved. This is my single aim, and this is how I measure my success. I fully accept that the process may redirect some hostility towards my talkpage, and I see this as a price to pay if one wants to get something done on Wikipedia. But if you examine the history of Afrocentrism, yes, and of Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism, you will have to admit that my approach has worked and that, after a little drama, we ended up with an improved article. dab (𒁳) 17:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Since futurebird opted to seek arbitration, I would now be rather interested in whether you do or do not intend to recall me. dab (𒁳) 20:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

CR edit

The edit you made today seems to have introduced some very odd problems, so I reverted it. I don't understand what made those errors - it seems like a software glitch of some sort. I think you'll have to redo the changes, as... well, look at the diff, it's very odd. Like the computer or server was suddenly baffled by the ref tags. Gah. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Rfa thanks

One of my favorite places Dear Pigman,

Thank you for supporting in my recent RfA. I have unchecked that pesky minor edit button. Words nor pictures can express my heartfelt appreciation at the confidence the community has shown me. I am both heartened and humbled by this confidence. I will carry the lessons learned from the constructive criticism I have received with me as I edit Wikipedia, and heed those lessons. Special thanks to Pedro and Henrik as nominators. Special thanks to Rudget who wanted to. A very special thanks to Moonriddengirl for her eloquence and perceptiveness.

Cheers, Dlohcierekim 19:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom

I have filed a case here, I just listed myself an Dbachmann as the involved parties, because I was unsure how to do it, if you would also like to be listed as an involved party and make a statement, please feel free to add your name and statement. futurebird 20:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Recently you said, "After his recent appearance in a few RfAs, I decided to look into what User:Evrik has been up to lately." Do you have an actual accusation that I've done something wrong? If not, it seems that your checkuser request is some sort of retaliation for my opposition in an RfA to someone who you've worked with a lot. --evrik (talk) 16:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:AN notification

Hi, just wanted to inform you that there's a discussion at WP:AN. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 21:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Megan Baker

Why does her page keep getting deleted? She is an important published photographer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doodlebuggermb (talk • contribs) 07:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Beanie Baby vandalism

If you go to the Beanie Baby page, it has been vandalized by user Jklm369 (who needs a perma-ban, btw). I can't figure out how to change the title (or the re-direction). Maybe you could look at it? I think it needs to be protected, also, since the vandal seems to have multiple IPs. Finally, how would I contact an admin directly about things like this? Thanks.... (I'm contacting you because you were the first person to get in touch with me when I started editing things) Marjaliisa 19:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Article deletion

"The result was delete. Technically, consensus leaned to "keep". However, I found the delete arguments stronger in this case."

Well, thank you for single handedly deciding what is and isn't relevant to Wikipedia's editors and users, even more so considering consensus was clearly in favour of keep. I'd mentioned during the discussion that I would add the relevant references when I had the time, which I currently do not, as I have a job and another article which I have been referencing since before this particular AfD nomination was added. Am I supposed to simply drop everything and come running at your beck and call because you don't have the patience or desire to wait for an article to be improved? I'm not sure what it is with you deletionists, but Wikipedia isn't going anywhere anytime soon. There's a virtually infinite period of time for an article to be upgraded with references and citations once somebody has the time to do so.

Of course, with bureaucrats like yourself arbitrarily deleting articles that you perceive as flawed at your leisure and whim, one would think that Wikipedia was on the verge of implosion every time an article of less-than-perfect standard wasn't AfD'd at the soonest available opportunity. I won't contest your decision. I'm sick of all the red tape and political nonsense that goes on behind this project and arguing the point with somebody who quite literally has policy and guideline articles attached to his talk page would almost certainly be an exercise in bureaucratic suicide for somebody who spends more time editing articles than enforcing policy. Gamer Junkie 04:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I should've known you'd just throw a guideline at me rather than offer any genuine, straightforward explanation. Why the article fails to meet notability, why you felt you couldn't give the opportunity for the article to be improved and why both you an Judgesurreal777 didn't bother attempting to fix the problems that have been pointed out before simply going ahead and deleting it would've been a good start. I don't know how much time you spend contributing to video game project related articles (or indeed any articles at all) but understand that the article in question took a long time for many dedicated editors just to get it up to the condition it was in. Now that you've taken the liberty of removing it completely, it will simply return in a few months even worse than ever. Not only without references, but badly spelled, highly inaccurate and ridiculously long-winded. When this happens, might I suggest that you be the first over there to try to improve it, although I'd bet you'll simply AfD nominate again. It's easier to delete an article than take the time to bring it up to the standards you demand, isn't it? Gamer Junkie 07:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I applaud the fact that you can nominate your own actions for evaluation, but I never contested your decision because that's exactly the response I had anticipated. Wikipedia's editors had already made themselves heard when the article was nominated. The only people evaluating your actions are those who feel the same way as you do. I cannot abide editors who spend more time on their elaborate user pages and in peer/policy/guideline/AfD review areas than they do actually contributing to the project's articles. And in the typically condescending fashion I've come to expect, they've labelled my genuine frustrations and grievances a "childish rant". Not surprising. It's an easy way to ignore the arguments of editors who don't cite policy and Wiki rules during conflict. Like I said, I'm glad you took all the official measures to ensure your actions were within the bounds of Wikipedia's ethics and guidelines, but this evaluation holds no authority in my eyes. I have little doubt that the article could have been brought up to standard if it had been given time to occur. This is how all articles on Wikipedia become better. Why it seems so difficult for some people to process such common sense logic baffles me. Gamer Junkie 04:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Tim Tebow

Um, someone has added an unlicensed picture on tim tebow's page; does that need to be removed? RC-0722 (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment/review

May I trouble you to look at the histories of Glenn Greenwald and Joe Klein? There are serious disagreements going on and nobody at Biography of Living Persons is offering an opinion on the controversies (at least as of this writing, anyway).
--Nbahn (talk) 04:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Samiharris has stated that he has no objections (albeit, with one qualifier) to the articles being reverted. Thank you for replying to my request.
--Nbahn (talk) 19:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk page for templates relating to pagan topics

Hello there Pigman, I'm aware that at least five different templates have recently been produced and added to pages within this general area. I'm a bit concerned that this profusion has taken place without much discussion from editors who work on these articles, and I'd suggest that this should be discussed centrally so that there is a degree of uniformity in articles within the same family. I'm writing to you because I know you have been involved with these articles quite closely. If you would like to join this discussion, please do not reply here, but go instead to the talk page I have set up for this purpose. Of course if you want to have a 1:1 discussion about this, then please do reply here or on my own talk page. Many thanks! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 00:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tangled Up Tour

Hi, Pigman. I see you closed the above AFD. I wonder if you would reconsider as 'no consensus'. The 'keep' arguments seem to be in more depth than the 'delete' (although I'm biased!), and I closed a similar AFD as keep (that article actually has less sources!). Consistency is important, I think you'll agree? The JPStalk to me 11:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

hey

Glad to see you are back in action (re revert just now)! Did you know that Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Salix alba is happening? Regards, Mattisse 00:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I did know about Salix alba's RfA but hadn't voiced my opinion. I've rectified that now. Cheers, Pigman☿ 00:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Aloha

I'm impressed with your writing abilities. Why don't you join us on the evaluating sources page and help out? —Viriditas | Talk 09:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Rude false remarks

I wrote an article about Margareta Svensson. It upsets me that it is deleted, but even more so that there are harassments from so called administers that apparently can say whatever they like, with no knowledge at all and no interest in finding out either. THOSE FALSE ALLEGATIONS will be what people will read about Margareta Svensson, not her extraordinary international career as a singer-pianist. There was NOTHING in that article that wasn't true, and if you administers were half-way professional you would find that out.

I had written I think three sentences when I had a message that she was not notable. And yes I did delete that message, and I only deleted that ONE, because it was not relevant. The article was not up. I couldn't imagine that someone who could write such a rude false remark after me having written almost nothing at all, could be favored. Is Wikipedia a game to see who can stand unfair beatings and just turn the other cheek?

I may have made the mistakes of creating an account with the name Margareta Svensson, because I thought that was how it was supposed to be done. And I also uploaded much before it was the final article, because I wanted to see that it worked. I didn't think anyone was that interested in my work that I got a comment long before I was done. Another lengthy rude comment, complained how I had worded a sentence, and I made changes to accommodate.

One comment that it couldn't be valid because references were in Swedish - I must say that arrogance does not even begin to describe such a comment. English is the language that is used by the world, but most people in the world does NOT have English as their first language.

It seems that administers are people with too much time on their hands who have nothing better to do than to quickly, within minutes of first activity, beat a new person down with rude, false remarks. Shouldn't you be interested instead? But being mean may be how you get your satisfaction? You are no better than bullying kids on the playground.

Ludwig Kaspersen User:Margareta Svensson (talk) 19:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Flash Loop

Please explain ...

02:53, 6 December 2007 Pigman (Talk | contribs) deleted "Flash loop" ‎ (PROD closing)

why ?

Gunnar Guðvarðarson (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

World Beer Drinking Championship

Even though it cant be defended in wrestling matches, it can be in beer drinking matches!

--PwnersRule (talk) 11:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)PwnersRule

It's time!

Salix alba. Mattisse 16:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Castiong Editor's Eye over spellings etc

I have pretty much finished for the day .. and yes, I am an inefficient edior. Your casing your editors eye over spellings, grammar etc is probably needed and will be appreciated.

Thanx ahead, in anticipation. Bruceanthro (talk) 04:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Copy editing request

Hello, Pigman,

I recently requested a copy edit from the League of Copy Editors and noticed that your name is included on the list of participants. At this writing, Jimmy McAleer, a B-class biography of an old-time American baseball figure, is in the peer review process. So far, all reviewers have suggested that the article is ready to send to the GAC. A couple of them recommended that I send it straight to the FAC. Before considering the latter, I would like to ensure that the article is as clean as possible. I'd greatly appreciate any time you're able to devote to it. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 15:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. Whenever it's convenient, I'd certainly appreciate your help. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 06:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, again, for your offer to copy edit Jimmy McAleer. Since then, I've received assurances from other reviewers that the prose is fairly clean. I'm aware that the League of Copy Editors is dealing with a huge backlog of requests. So, I removed my request from the list to make way for contributors with more urgent concerns. Once again, thanks for getting back to me. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

HELP

I would liketo request FULL protection for the Christmas article. There is an edit awr that I would like to see stopped. RC-0722 (talk) 01:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

League of Copyeditors roll call

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there.
The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 17:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

re: Late Congrats

I'm late to the party as usual; you've already cleaned up the other well-wishers' comments into an archive. Still, best wishes. Soon you will understand the janitorial metaphor all too well. If you need any help, don't hesitate to drop me a line. Stupid mistakes are par for my admin education but I daresay I've also learned a bit. Cheers, Pigman☿ 19:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I will certainly drop you a line if something comes up. Cheers! - Revolving Bugbear 01:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Solveig Sandnes

An editor has nominated Solveig Sandnes, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solveig Sandnes and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks re adminship

Hi piggy, just wanted to thank you for all your work keeping the tallies accurate on my RfA. Hope new year is treating you well. --Salix alba (talk) 11:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Outside opinion on Reproductive rights

Hello, Pigman. I was advised to ask you for an outside opinion on an ongoing dispute over at Reproductive rights, regarding documentation and whether or not a statement is fact and how it should be attributed. If you have the time, your thoughts on these matters would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Phyesalis (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the fast response. I hope it's fair to qualify my tone and behavior on the talk page by stating that this dispute is part of a protracted pattern that seems to have developed from an RfC at Talk:Circumcision, through Talk:Female genital cutting, and now here. Phyesalis (talk) 05:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand, I just didn't want you to think that the Talk page was an example of how I start out my usual interaction. I'm only asking for your opinion on the issues as stated in the overview. Please take your time, I appreciate the thorough approach. Phyesalis (talk) 06:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Just a note to let you know that I'm disengaging for a short while from the discussion on RR. I have a different perspective than Blackworm, but I'm not going to address it at this time. If you have any questions for me, I'd be happy to reply here (or my talk) or on RR's talk (upon request). Thank you for your continued efforts in this matter. Phyesalis (talk) 03:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The thinking out loud was no problem. If nothing else, it has bolstered my faith in the wiki process. I agree that the article would be better served if Blackworm would concentrate on creating a neutral section for that particular POV. You are most correct, he has a point. I've invited him to contribute sourced content to that POV numerous times (specifically mentioning how this would make the lead issue so much more approachable). I too see a need for that info to be included if the article is to address all notable issues equitably. I have never had an objection to the inclusion of reliable material to that effect.
Stepping back has provided me some time to go over various guidelines and essays and dealing with particular behaviors. I see now that I have added fuel to the fire by not taking more appropriate actions earlier. I should not have fed the local fauna. I should have asked for a third opinion after my second "stepping back" and attempts to compromise failed to yield productive results. But after he accused me of canvassing in the midst of my latest stepping back at RR, he followed me to Talk:Genital modification and mutilation and posted this. I'm just over it. I'm now abstaining from discussion and editing on 4 pages but he keeps moving into other pages I edit, starting issues like the one here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gender Studies#Neutral Wikiproject?. I'm thinking this has become more than a single issue, one that cannot be resolved by an article RfC. Phyesalis (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. I've left a brief note in response to the matter. Phyesalis (talk) 20:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Please explain what "obvious POV" you believe I have.

In [talk:Phyesalis&curid=7843568&diff=182161874&oldid=182068258 this] recent User Talk page message, you said to another editor that I have "a point as well as an obvious POV in relation to this article," the article being Reproductive rights. I would like you to please expand on precisely what you believe my obvious point of view in relation to the article is, and what specific things I said to give you that impression. I would appreciate a response here or on my Talk page. Thank you. Blackworm (talk) 23:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Pigman, I came back here in order to strike a warmer tone with you, feeling that my comments may be interpreted as an attack. However, I discovered a disturbing post by you in your User space. You were responding gleefully (until I read the following, I fully supported your attitude) to having your User page vandalized, as a mark of valor, if I'm not mistaken. You were making fun of the vandals. You wrote (about the vandals):

I sense a pattern here. These boys (I think it's safe to assume they are male)[Emphasis mine -BW] apparently believe I would be offended by being called gay or by saying I have sex with men.

– User:Pigman/Bon mots

I think that display of sexism (referring to presumed males as the diminutive boys -- can you imagine someone referring to a presumed female editor as a girl in Wikipedia?) and gender bias (assuming vandals are male), even in jest, is entirely inappropriate, especially coming from a Wikipedia administrator. The fact you appeared, at the request of an editor in the Wikiproject Gender Studies to help resolve a dispute in a gender-related article seems doubly disturbing. In any case, could you please remove or rephrase consider removing or rephrasing [-BW] the comments I believe have no place in Wikipedia that are in your User space? Thank you. Blackworm (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN

Hi Pigman, I don't want to prejudge your position on the Blackworm AN posting but I think it might be a good idea to do something about it. If you want to take the issue on further through dispute resolution it's up to you. Personally I see no benefit in a user RFC and I'm just not sure what would come of WP:ANI, right now I think a topic ban would be too harsh.

However, it seems that both Blackworm and Phyesalis‎ are willing to try formal meditation. I'm not sure what will come of it but I think it's worth a try. I'd tend towards giving him another chance to demonstrate AGF of other users and suspend the AN where it is, but it's your call--Cailil talk 20:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Pigman, Cailil seems to me to be continuing to make accusations of me failing to WP:AGF. I never lost faith in Cailil, nor is there any reason I would, to my knowledge. We seem to have agreed or at least abided on every content issue we've ever discussed. How else would I demonstrate the assumption of good faith? Is good faith about what POV I might have? I don't even see why Cailil and I seem to be at odds to Cailil, and I assume any mediator would be asking Cailil why that is so. I'm eagerly awaiting the answer. I don't like being at odds with valuable editors.[It's actually not clear to me which of us Cailil is referring to in the giving him a chance sentence above. Is it clear to you, Pigman? -BW]
I trust in your decisions, Pigman, and again, sorry if you feel I attacked you. I'm really not getting the impression you're that upset, mostly because I'm not, so if you are, let's work it out. I made a possibly bad decision early in jumping into Wikipedia's deep end, into a hugely controversial [subject with an -BW] article written to very high standards. The "tough love" given me by editors to help purge me of my zeal for disruptive, policy violating edits, perhaps taught me that attitude, which might spill over sometimes. Phyesalis' edits were, as I saw it, simply not written to the standard I had learned thanks to those who reined me in, that is, WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:NOR. I'll cool it, as you see appropriate. Blackworm (talk) 22:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "O"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "P"s through "S"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. (PS, nice page tabs... :) ) ++Lar: t/c 04:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Mediation info

Hi Pigman, I have a few questions, if you have the time. I have no experience in these kinds of matters, but I'm trying to reach a compromise with Coppertwig regarding his involvement with RR and FGC. I'm hoping that with some discussion he and I can come to a compromise outside of formal mediation. It really wasn't my intention to bring Coppertwig into it. When Cailil suggested it, I did think it was a good idea, given CT's opposition to the fact that reproductive rights have been ratified by the UN. However, CT has made some good points. I haven't really discussed what I consider to be the tendentious aspects of his interactions with him as being explicitly tendentious. So might you wait a day or two while I try to work this out with him before making your decision?

Also, I've never filed a mediation request, is that something I or Blackworm do? Because there are some aspects of his behavior that I have not addressed in the initial discussion but would like to see addressed in mediation. Do I need to post them now, or is it OK to wait? Thank you for your time. Phyesalis (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation should answer some of your questions. I'm in no rush to take any action on this so please do talk with Coppertwig. If possible, less formal means of resolving differences and reaching a level of mutual respect are always preferable to formal proceedings. Either of you can file a request for mediation. Then an outside party will be assigned to help everyone reach a mutually agreeable working solution. It may take a little time before someone takes the case. This works best if, at the beginning of the process, a clearly articulated description of the problem between the people laid out.
My WP:AN post was mostly to make sure a wider group of admins and editors were aware of Blackworm's actions and attitudes. If there had been a specific violation of policy by BW, I would have blocked him or asked another admin to do it. The post was also a way of putting BW on notice that he was getting negative attention for his actions and he should consider re-orienting his behaviour on Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Wikipedians are very tolerant but long-term incivility or consistent obstructionism or an inability to "play well with others" will eventually result in consequences for an editor.
My observation is that both CT and BW had some good points about the content of the RR article but BW's method seemed particularly abrasive and very stubbornly uncompromising. It would also be better if, instead of just objecting or inserting their views into the article, they would also include some substantial WP:V sources to support these views. This is a pet peeve of mine. Anyway, if you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask me. Cheers, Pigman☿ 02:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice. I've talked things over with him and told him that I'd support his exclusion from mediation but he was willing to join in. All three of us are now working on a mediation proposal at User talk:Phyesalis/Mediation request. I agree that they had some good points. I'd asked both of them previously if they'd like to collaborate on a section or sections addressing their POV on several occasions. Both have declined. Coppertwig says it isn't in his schedule and Blackworm just hasn't ever accepted the offer or contributed any content to that effect. I'll do it myself, if no one else has, after I finish the section on the human rights context and actually demarcating what the rights (contested and otherwise) actually are. Phyesalis (talk) 07:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Garth Marenghi

I'm not going to bother fighting the result at this point, though I will put it up in a few months if it doesn't receive any actual information, but I have a couple of questions. First, would you be willing to switch to "no consensus, as there were three delete votes (four counting the anon), two merge votes, and one weak keep vote, while there were only two full keep votes? And when you speak of reliable sources, you do realize that only one of them really does anything past citing that the character has appeared in a few different works or citing in-universe information? Those are supplemental, so they don't add to the notability of the character, and the one that does is pretty trivial. It seems that you just judged it for quantity over quality. TTN (talk) 20:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Feminism

I'm leaving notes for those of you interested in a Feminism project/portal. There's a discussion at WT:GS#Portal proposal over some ideas. Thanks. Phyesalis (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi piggy!

Have you seen the little piggies crawling in the dirt
And for all the little piggies life is getting worse
Always having dirt to play around in

Have you seen the bigger piggies in their starched white shirts
You will find the bigger piggies stirring up the dirt
Always have clean shirts to play around in

In their sties with all their backing
They don't care what goes on around
In their eyes there's something lacking
What they need's a damn good whacking

Everywhere there's lots of piggies living piggy lives
You can see them out for dinner with their piggy wives
Clutching forks and knives to eat their bacon

- Can’t catch me, I’m the Gingerbread Man —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.230.208.106 (talk) 19:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice. Really, I'm not being sarcastic; Beatles lyrics are always welcome here. To really impress me though, try some Nine Inch Nails. And why exactly would I want to catch you? Are you being naughty? Please play nice and be constructive. Cheers, Pigman☿ 02:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi

i have reacently decided to say hi to everyone i can to try to help make wikipedia a more frendly place, and make everyone's day better. you are to be one of the people my mission affects. so with out further antichipation, HI

Drance I know 7 19:42, 7 January 2008

Toa Nuva

Why did you delete the Toa Nuva page! I loved that page! it was so cool and informative. Please, please un-delete it. I'm begging! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.8.21.184 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:55, 16 January 2008

A fan writes...

fag —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jloo77 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

  • O ye of minimal vocabulary and imagination, harken hard to my plea: monosyllabic insults are stupid, insipid and very poor excuses for proper cursing. Fag is such a sad little word for insulting someone. And, for a significant percentage of people, it's not an insult but merely a descriptor. In the future, try this one: "Your merkin has scabies and mange." Isn't that an interesting and unusual phrase, an evocative yet specific insult? If the person you direct it towards doesn't know what a merkin is, so much the better. Then you are also insulting their vocabulary, intelligence, and education. Another possibility might be "spawn of mutated reptile offal." I mean, fag; it's just such a... flaccid insult, very unexciting and very conventional. I encourage you to find your own special phrases and a unique voice with which to express displeasure and insult. But I don't encourage you to use such phrases on Wikipedia where civility in interactions is the rule. And please don't take any of these phrases I've used here as being directed at you; they are not. They are just examples I'm offering because I'm concerned about the profound lack of poetry and vibrancy of your attempt at insult. A commonly used insult is a dead insult, impotent and feeble. A well-crafted insult is a thing of beauty and grace that can win admiration from your target/enemy if used properly. Isn't that better than just starting a rumble/fight with a crude vulgarity? (shakes head mournfully) Waggishly (or is that faggishly?), Pigman☿ 03:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Seen the pig-barn yet?

Have you seen the biggest pig-barn photo? :-) -- Alexf42 12:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello.

I have recently visited the "13th warrior" wiki page and someone keeps deleting this statment "You people do realize that at the time this story was set quite the opposite was happening in history. The crusades were occuring at approximatelly the same time. When the guy dressed in the green outfit modeled after a roman legionair's uniform failed trying to kill the little blond guy, uttilizing the tall redheaded guy, at approximatelly the same time in real history roman catholisism was being accepted by the norse. Authors some times use phase shifts, temporal overlapings, reflections, and the like to make they stories more marketable. Besides didn't the norse have a history of drinking blood? Which probbible stemed from cannabalism which quite a few cultures whether they like it or not have in their history." from the section "Fantasy?". Iam not sure why it was deleted. When the statment was in a differnet section "Backwards" I belived it was deleted because it belonged in the "Fantasy?" section. I have only run into something like this on an ancient egypt page where their was rampant deletions of opposing views contributions. However being deleted from the "fantasy? section of the "13 warrior" discusion page seems odd to me. I was wondering if you could look into it for me?--207.14.209.251 (talk) 05:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

In response, I am not sure how that is a side conversation In a section that is filled with people discusing the historical validity of the movie the "13 Warrior". I mean the movie is fiction and clearlly so it just seemed odd to me personally that some thought it was a reworking of Grendal/Beowulf or some long lost historical writings. I was also unable to see your comments untill I replaced the paragraph after which I removed it for protocalls sake. I ran into some very odd groups of people before.--207.14.209.251 (talk) 06:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Happy-melon

I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 15:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi, just dropping by to say thanks for supporting my RfA, I totally wasn't expecting to get so much support, it was a really pleasant surprise. Melesse (talk) 04:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Melesse (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Repeated edits to add apparently non-notable person to a page

I was directed to your page by your post in Wikipedia:Editor assistance.

An editor has been adding an apparently non-notable person to Bexley High School since July. Back in July, two different editors posted to the user's talk page questioning the edit. In September, I attempted first to revert, then to request a citation for the addition. In both cases, my edits were simply reverted. Looking at the page history, I see that from time to time, others have removed the reference, only to have it restored within the week. As far as I can tell, the editor has never responded to any queries or reverts, except to restore the edit. I don't watch the page closely, but I happened to notice that the revert/restore happened again within the past week.

What can be done in a case like this? I've already spent way more time on this than I'd like, just trying to figure out what can be done. But it seems a shame to just let it lie. Jwolfe (talk) 09:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Glam Metal bands

Why did you delete this list? There are lists for every Heavy Metal sub-genre available, why this Glam Metal one was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JKKDARK (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Just thought you might be interested in this: Portal:Feminism/Feminism_Task_Force --Grrrlriot (talk) 23:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I can has thankspam?

Quick, let's delete the front page!

OhanaUnited's RFA

.: Thank you! :.

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


My RfA

Image:David,larry.JPG My RFA
Thank you muchly for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successfully closed on 76%, finishing at 73 supports, 23 opposes and 1 neutral. The supports were wonderful, and I will keep in mind the points made in the useful opposes and try to suppress the Larry David in me! Now I'm off to issue some cool down blocks, just to get my money's worth!

Kidding btw. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

You might be interested

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Blackworm_disrupting_discussion_pages--Cailil talk 13:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Tangled Up Tour

In case you have forgotten, I am referring to pop group Girls Aloud's forthcoming tour. The page was deleted. You posted the result of the vote so I am assuming you have the authority. Is it possible in some way that there can be a vote on whether or not this page could be 'resurrected' or recreated? A few people have recreated it but it has been deleted again, due to "recreaton of deleted material". The tour is in a month or two and a number of dates have been announced, which I could easily reference. Kylie Minogue's new tour KYLIEX2008 starts around the same time and its page has not been deleted. I feel that people were biased because Girls Aloud are considered a "prefab pop group" due to the fact that they were formed from Popstars: The Rivals. BambooBanga (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. BambooBanga (talk) 00:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Irish towns

Hi Pigman! We've created Project Ireland in the russian section of Wikipedia. We plan to create (supported by a bot) articles about all irish towns and villages on the base of the english Wikipedia. Now we are thinking about the names of the articles. It would be political correctly to transliterate the irish (gaelic) names. On the other hand, english language is common used in Ireland and it's much more easier for us to take the english pronouncation. Most of us understand english, but only some linguists can read irish words. What would you propose us to do? --Obersachse (talk) 18:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Winter Magic again

Hi Paul

Thanks for the time and thought you put into your response. In truth, I have only been vaguely aware of the rules around using Wikipedia. This has been a learning process. I now understand the issues around puffery. I would be happy for it to stay but would like to avoid people adding material such as "Feral Fest" to the description of the event. As I said in previous correspondence, this has been a pejorative term used by people who are anti the Festival for their various reasons. It is a major event that has come from community as opposed to many tourism promotions and concepts that are meant to trap the unsuspecting. As it is a Festival held on an open street there is no admission charge. The whole event is free. As I said earlier, the ABC (Australia's BBC) does a live broadcast back to Sydney.

Is there an advantage in adding other references? From your comments below it seems pretty obvious that this would be a good move.

Thanks again

Warren Ross

Katoombawarren (talk) 03:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for Speedy Deletion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Lynn_Best

Could you please delete this article?

Reason for deletion: "blantant advertising".

A template that was uncontested for five days has been on this wiki page. Like the Mike Watt page you deleted, this page also is used by the same author to blantantly advertise his amateur acting/writing career. Thanx for helping to make Wiki a better place and thanx for your time spent on wiki page maintenance.Tromatical (talk) 06:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Charles Thorn

Not a problem, if we can find some reliable sources. Corvus cornixtalk 17:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like we found some notability.  :) Corvus cornixtalk 23:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted page: The Burke Group

Hello Pigman, can you offer some advice? This page was deleted, supposedly because it was unnotable and POV. It definitely was negative, but I do not think that means POV. There was a complaint about it. But I think instant deletion is less than appropriate. It was meant to be not notable, but I strongly disagree. I suspect that there is more to this than a deletion policy. I want the page back, and if more information which is positive then that can be added to balance. But it surely should not be deleted. Wikidea 20:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message - Guy was very helpful, and yes I do want to make it NPOV! Being a labour lawyer certainly makes me bias, but that doesn't mean anything I wrote in the article was. The problem of course is it's pretty hard to find anything that isn't. I take your point about asserting its notability (though I think this was already there, given the number of articles) and won't trouble you with it, since you're working on other stuff. If you want, check back later when I put it up again. I think removing that big quote is the main thing, and giving a fuller account of the non-union busting activities. Wikidea 23:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, but I do think that pages should be proposed for deletion with some warning first! Wikidea 23:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Intellig

Thanks for letting me know. It appears he added more after I tagged it. I thought it was just a made-up word when I saw it so I tagged it. J.delanoygabsadds 03:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Cecily Bonville

I see you have changed the article "Cecily Bonville" to "Cecilia Grey".That name is incorrect as she is listed in all historical documents and books as CECILY BONVILLE."Cecilia Grey is certainly going to be challenged by other editors.Grey was her married name.She was Baroness Bonville in her own right.Other than that,the article looks good,although,I must research more on her great-grandfather as I have read he was the first Baron Bonville and not her father.Why else would she have inherited the title of Bonville in February(after her great-grandfather's death?)jeanne (talk) 06:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

.Cecily is the name she's referred to in all documents.Cecily also happened to be the first name of King Edward IV's mother and his daughter, so it was a fairly common name in the Middle Ages.jeanne (talk) 17:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Quick Deletion: Anders Love Maria

Hello, Pigman! I have seen you have deleted this stub - it was marked as a candidate for quick deletion under allegation of non-notability. I provided comparative data on a reputable measurement tool (Alexa) that shows it in comparable numbers to other comic of its country which has a Wikipedia entry, thinking it would be enough evidence of notability - which appeared not to be. Can you please give me some advice on that matter, in particular: do you believe I should have provided extra evidence? What kind would be appropriate for a webcomic? Thank you! Chester br (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Irish Wikipedians Surprise Draw

You have won the Irish Wikipedians surprise draw!! Just leave a message on my talk page to receive the prize of USD 1,000,000 or EUR 638,442.37 or GBP 505,871.414 Markreidyhp 07:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Undelete request

Good afternoon. Please undelete David M. Hayes bio page. Subject is a French Knight. see Wikipedia reference please to Chivalry, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordre_National_du_Merite. Note too previous undeletion by a Wikipedia administrator before you. Also, your advice is welcome. Thank you. Davidmhayes (talk) 17:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)davidmhayes

Quick Deletion: Southwest Gate Incident

I would like more information on why the article I submitted was summarily deleted, without any chance to explain it.

The article was not an "attack page" at all. It was about a specific event that did happen and has been referenced in several sources. Chemguy2 (talk) 22:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Pigman : could you please, explain to me in plain english why my lacrosse article was deleted as I have done some of the reading you directed me to but to me it is a little overwhelming...and I don't really understand some of the things ....Paulywog54 (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Pigman: Thanks, for taking the time to explain it, in terms that I can understand...very, very much appreciated....kind regards, Paul

forgot

Hi, Pigman: I just send you and message and forgot to sign it Paulywog54 (talk) 13:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Notching

1. Why did you delete this quite so rapidly?

2. Why did this article ever get considered for speedy deletion?

3. If your criteria for deleting it was based solely on a commercial link (hardly a novelty!), why delete the whole article?

This was a bad article, on a good topic. I'd refer you to my own comments on its now deleted talk page, and on User_talk:Orangemike#Notching. This smells of hairtrigger editors who would rather play with the admin toys than ever dirty their hands writing content, coupled with an admin who has an inexplicable haste, an aversion to discussion with other peer editors, and a simple failure to look at the timestamps from creation to deletion. Wikipedia is not supposed to work like this. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring it. Much appreciated. I'll see what I can do about licking this little group of metalworking articles into shape. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)