User:RenamedUser jaskldjslak901/Archive37

Tommy Everidge

Since the individual in question was deemed individually notable, don't you think his article should stay where it is? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

• • It was kept by the article creator, and people that are extreme inclusionists against minor league baseball players. Consensus is usually to merge them. Tag should belong. Secret ^account 14:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you find a link or diff to this consensus? I am only for redirecting player names if they are not individually notable according to

WP:BIO; that is generally notable by receiving in depth coverage by independent and reliable sources. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk

14:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

• MZMcBride (talk · contribs) resigned his status as an administrator on April 6, 2009, while the above arbitration case was pending. Should MZMcBride request restoration of adminship privileges, he will be required to submit a request for adminship or approval of the Committee.
• MZMcBride is directed to consult with and obtain approval from the Bot Approvals Group before using any bot to edit Wikipedia and particularly before using any bot to undertake administrator actions.
• MZMcBride and those working with him are commended for developing an innovative method to identify articles with potential BLP issues, but are strongly urged to consult and carefully consider whether the current location and nature of the listing of the output of the script represents the most appropriate means of addressing the issues raised.
• MZMcBride is directed to create user accounts distinct from his own, clearly identified as
  bots
  and clearly associated to his primary account, from which to execute any automated or semi automated task that can make edits or administrative actions.
• MZMcBride is restricted from making edits or actions from his primary account that are either (a) automated, or (b) at a rate higher than twelve actions per minute. Edits or actions made from authorized bot accounts are not so restricted.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety ^talk 23:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Hi!

Your name is mentioned here - just thought I'd let you know! Cheers, Majorly talk 02:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I saw, no comment, also I'm not a minor. Secret ^account 12:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Erick (2007)

Is Mergers for discussion really the best place for the article? According to the Wikilink, it's not even ready for use. I was told at FAR to try AFD, and now that looks like the wrong idea. It doesn't seem like there is any place to discuss an article like that, which is a shame since there are some people that disagree with its existence/featured status. Should I just continue the FAR, or should I just accept the frustration of being unable to have a complete and thorough discussion? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Mergers for discussion is the best place, because people will keep the article without commenting on the notabilty of the subject, because the process is called articles for deletion not for a merge. Usually when articles get merged in AFD, the nominator wants it to be deleted first, but here is not the case. Try your luck there and delay the FAR for now. Secret ^account 17:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Jamarcus Saunders

Hello, RenamedUser jaskldjslak901. You have new messages at MacGyverMagic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just make sure you say exactly what you mean next time, and it should get through no problem, provided that it's really not controversial. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of R&B musicians (2nd nomination)

As you made the original nomination for this article, you may be interested in the above. Black Kite 19:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

New image project

Hi. This little form letter is just a courtesy notice to let you know that a proposal to merge the projects

Selena's Classic Series albums

Hi. Being listed as a major contributor to the Selena article, I thought you might be able to help with this. I was bordering on an edit war with User:Crodude86 over the articles for Selena's Classic Series of albums that were released in 2006/2007 (I've seen sources listing one or the other). There are five articles for each of five volumes from the Classic Series. As stated in these articles, they are re-issues of earlier albums from Selena's teen years, remastered and available digitally (CD and download) presumably for the first time. As they are re-issues of earlier album, it was my intent to merge each Classic Series article with its original release. The rereleased versions are not necessarily notable enough for their own article and, as they are updates to original albums, I felt a merge was warranted. I was working on Volumes 1 and 2, but the changes I made to the original album articles kept getting reverted. As I created redirects from the Classic Series of albums, Crodude86 though would keep creating new articles with a new disambiguation title (from Selena album to Selena's album to Selena Quintanilla album) rather than reverting the redirects as well. This was never going to end, so I halted and decided to seek third party advice.

According to what the album articles say (as independent sources were difficult to find), the albums I'd like to see merged are:

Classic Series, Vol. 1 (Selena ALBUM) ---> Alpha (Selena album)

Classic Series, Vol. 2 (Selena ALBUM) ---> Muñequito de Trapo

Classic Series, Vol. 3 ---> And the Winner Is...

Classic Series, Vol. 4 ---> Preciosa (album)

Dulce Amor

I apologize for the length of my message and I hope you can help. If not, could you suggest where I can take this to? Thanks so much! --Wolfer68 (talk) 18:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Stuff

Semi-protected your talk page for a bit; I don't want to leave it indefinite, since there could easily be valid reasons for an IP or new user to need to contact you.

Also, I noticed a couple of log items that outed you in various ways; I took the liberty of suppressing them. Hope you don't mind. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yea I understand, I used to have a page for IP address to contact me, I'm not sure if I do now. Bleh 3,000,000 articles now, and 20,000 of them in either AFD or Prod. Secret ^account 18:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If you do set up a page for new users/IPs to contact you, let me know and I'll be happy to up the protection level. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Specific appetite

Hello Secret, this is an automated message from

Happy Birthday!

Hey, RenamedUser jaskldjslak901. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the oh hai. ) 15:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Steel Guiliana (disambiguation)

Hi, I'm surprised you declined to speeedy delete Steel Guiliana (disambiguation) due the presence of a keep on the AFD. The Steel Guiliana article is at the correct title, and contains the exact same text. Regardless of the outcome of the AFD, the so-called disambiguation article will still need to be deleted as it not a disambiguation page, and not a valid redirect. I won't press the issue, but please reconsider. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 21:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Killed Secret ^account 21:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for reconsidering, and the prompt response. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 21:41, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Erin

Hi. You deleted my A7 speedy deletion request for

I am sorry but I have serious reservations about Andre restoring your admin rights given EVula's previous refusal to do so. I have raised the matter on the crat noticeboard: [1]. WJBscribe (talk) 02:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Question

Why do you say "desyropping" instead of "desysopping"? Enigma^msg 02:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I was just about to ask the same thing... thought it was a typo or vandalism on your talk page, but then I saw you used it twice. Didn't see a reply on Enigma's page. Any hints for us?  7  07:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Typo Secret ^account 15:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up

MogileFS

I request to undo the MogileFS deletion, if you see the discussion is by no means, spam. The page itself can be considerate weak, but the Software itself is considerated the best Open source option to Google File System. The article is linked inside Wikipedia by other pages about Distributed File Systems.

Deletion of valuable reference, because other causes is not good for the Wikipedia. Tuqui (talk) 10:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I was doing quite a bit of research into alternative file systems, and when I noticed the confused, erroneous and missing information here on MogileFS, I thought it would be a contribution to the community to try and improve and correct it. I'm a little disappointed that you've chosen to delete what I spent my time on - IMHO it doesn't really encourage people like me to bother improving the content in wikipedia. I'm sorry if its your "job", but its rather off-putting for rookies Artemgy (talk) 13:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI, there's a deletion review for MogileFS up now- can you comment on it? Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 November 30#MogileFS. tedder (talk) 17:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

CSD nom

Secret - apologies for wasting your time with the incorrect CSD nom for the New Distances article. I had mistakenly read the criteria as "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant or where the artist's article does not exist. Lesson learned! Cheers, Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 19:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

G12

Hi. Just wanted to remind you that

		Dear RenamedUser jaskldjslak901, I apologise for deceiving you.
		Wikipedia:Newbie treatment at CSD/Atama and your input would be most welcome. -- Atama頭 19:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Life in a Jar

Hi! I am a new editor and I am not sure why there is a copyright issue on the Life in a Jar page that was deleted. I would be glad to make adjustments if I understood what the problem was and where the issue has occurred. I feel Life in a Jar is a very important project and needs to be included in wikipedia's database. I wrote all of the information from my own words other than the quotes listed as being spoken or written by Irena Sendler herself. I have also asked the website owner of Life in a Jar to give permission to the use of information from the www.irenasendler.org website even though I am not sure as to which area I have used information from. I did not copy and past any information on the Life in a Jar page that I created from the website www.irenasendler.org. I would appreciate any help you could provide in solving this issue. Thank you, Tikkun Olam 1910 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikkunolam1910 (talk • contribs) 19:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I restored, right now it's a redirect, try to find some extra

Thank you for your help. How does this help me get the Life in a Jar article back up that was deleted? I am sorry I am a little lost in the wikipedia lingo. Thank you, Tikkun Olam 1910 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikkunolam1910 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Monomorium dentatum

I had contested the speedy deletion to allow discussion ("hangon"). Please undelete the page. --G.Hagedorn (talk) 20:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Unless you have evidence that the information in the page isn't a

Hangon explains that the purpose of it is to allow discussion. However, discussion is prevented by you deleting it together with the discussion page, where discussion had started. Please restore to allow discussion. Or please explain what you mean by "blue link" above. --G.Hagedorn (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It allows discussion, but a administrator still can delete the article if it violates guidelines, as this one did. I'm talking about

I am not negating you any rights. I am just asserting that we would like to discuss it. The article was placed on Wikipedia by the owners of plazi.org themselves. Allowing discussion of deletion would be simple, please revert to deletion after discussion. --G.Hagedorn (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Follow this, and it should be taken care of and undeleted. Secret ^account 21:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed prod from Dustin Hopkins

Hello Secret, this isn't a template, just a notice that I removed the proposed deletion tag you left on this article. There seems to be a lot of coverage of the guy in the news, even for a college football player. (Without that coverage, I would have endorsed the deletion per

21:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I thought just yesterday, "wow, I haven't seen C:CSD this clear in a while...oh, wait...Secret's back!" :) Nice work. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Ram Madhvani

Didn't Ram Madhvani contain a non-copyvio version? I think I made some edits to the article before because I have it on my watchlist, and Madhvani seems notable. Theleftorium 15:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The version I deleted was copyvio, I'll restore a non-copyvio version that you did. Or just restart the article from scratch, which I recommend, and I'll semi-protect from the copyvio violators. Secret ^account 15:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you userfy it for me? Theleftorium 15:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Theleftorium/Ram Madhvani. I didn't restore the copyvio versions. Thanks Secret ^account 15:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll let you know when I've cleaned up the article. Theleftorium 15:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I've created the article now. Can you restore the talk page? Theleftorium 18:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thomas German deletion

Re that deletion, there is two others from the same editor and from the same site. Kade Klemke and Bryce Carroll. Tyson Slattery article has the same origin but has had the copyvio removed. duffbeerforme (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou for your quick attention to the issue. duffbeerforme (talk) 16:56, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

CISU deletion

Dear Secret, I understand what is your role, but the CISU article refers to an italian no profit organization, added to add more information in the article List of UFO organizations, the organization CISU [2] is exactly like the British UFO Research Association web site [3] and like all the other organizations indicated in such article. So I really don't understand your action. Obviously the article need to be completed but I was thinking to do it from today. So now if you want you can do it now and in future. Thanks.--Abyssadventurer (talk) 07:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

It didn't claim notability, the deletion tag was placed for hours also before I deleted it. I did the favor of userfying it for you so you can work on the article, as where it stands, it fails guidelines. User:Abyssadventurer/CISU. Thanks Secret ^account 12:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi there. I just want to point out, that your edit summary (not a A3) of the

Hello, fellow Hip Hop WikiProject members!

This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 04:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Deleted Article Recreated

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that the article which you deleted in 2008 is now back up again. Amsaim (talk) 16:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

ReCaptcha Solver OCR

I just wanted to inquire about your reasoning for deleting this article. You listed it as A7, even though the article was about software, which is ineligible for deletion under that category. Thanks! TNXMan 17:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, just a follow up, wanted to see if you've had a chance to look at this yet. TNXMan 14:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes I saw, I tend to have a broader criteria for speedy deletion than most newer adminstrators because of experience. I do that with obvious essays, newly coined

Been recreated word for word infact, I redeleted it and salt it. Secret ^account 03:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Camaron/Arbitration Committee/December 2009 Elections

Just so you know I have moved and answered the query you left at

Midrash Samuel 2 Book I

Some Bible translations are subject to copyright and the cited website did have a copyright notice. That's why I used the copyright violation speedy. But all is well ;) Eeekster (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Greater Victoria Cycling Coalition

Hello Secret, this is an automated message from

Thanks for the message and the expression of confidence! At the moment I am (despite how it may seem from my contribution history!) too busy IRL (year end is a crazy time for M&A lawyers) to devote the time and attention to an RFA that it requires. However, early in the New Year things will have eased up so I will reconsider then. Again, thanks for the kind words. – ukexpat (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

RFA again

There are a few problems that I would face as an RFA candidate. Chief among them is the fact that I really don't do any admin-related work; most of my contributions are in the fields of article-cleaning and content reviewing. Also, my edit count is probably lower than RFA is looking for. I'm thankful that you consider me a trustworthy editor, but I must decline a nom. Between article reviewing and real life, I can't devote the time to administration duties that they require. Thanks for offering, though. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the offer as well, but that's never going to happen again. ;)

^talk

at 22:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Question

Wow, this is funny because I was just about to ask you if you would nominate me. I might just create the psychic barnstar right now and bestow it upon you. I would love to go through the process now, as it had been exactly three months since the last one and i've improved a lot since then. I sure hope that i've improved since it's been a while, but not too long that I forgot how to do it. So yes, I would be willing to go through the process.

And yes, I also feel like I have improved a lot since then since I have put a few of those issues behind me. Also, looking back at it, I think I will enjoy some of the odd questions, like the flirtation one that I received at my last one.

talk

) 18:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Will do it soon, the issue is right now I'm in class and editing with a blackberry, which is hard. Secret ^account 19:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I emailed you, reply back. Thanks Secret ^account 20:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Got it. Do you think that I need to rewrite question one as it seemed to be the only thing without an issue. If you don't think so, could you please e-mail me what I said. Thanks.

talk

) 21:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Check your e-mail inbox please. Thanks.

Was that e-mail supposed to have anything in it other than what I sent?

talk

) 22:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No Secret ^account 22:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm ready to set it up now.

Before I go ahead with this, I want to know what you think of a prominent user's concerns. I'm e-mailing them to you right now.

Sure, you can start where Julian left off.

RFA3

I'm honored you feel I am qualified. I'm not closed to the idea, but I feel I've been involved in contentious subject matter in the past that might come back and bite me, and I'm not sure if this would help either. But like I said, I'm not completely opposed to the idea.

Well, Secret, I see no reason why a nomination would do any harm. If you are confident in my ability and worthiness, I trust that judgement and would be honored if you were to nominate me.

Writing it up while we speak, answer the questions well. Secret ^account 21:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much Secret. I'm a bit ignorant here, once I answer the questions, how am I expected to be involved in the process? Is it neccessary to respond to opposes?

11

22:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not neccessary to repond to opposes, it's rather nonrecommended unless what they said isn't true. Thanks Secret ^account 22:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Secret, it doesn't look as if I'm doing too hot.

11

03:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

RfA (4)