User talk:Cirt/Archive 17

Okay, I'll try that, thanks! — Cirt (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw this come across and thought you might want to provide your thoughts, as I did, at

I agree with most of your comment, diff, regarding your characterization of this page. — Cirt (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Sarah-Louise Young.....

Beside being so beautiful, Sarah's talent in ALL the fields of endevour is truly amazing. In the event of a trip to Los Angeles, I wish to interview her and the work in which she is now (or then) currently involved. My 20 years as a music biz exec (now retired) may be able to be of some help. Somehow I'd like her to get my IP addy.

R.L.??TILDES?? NOT ON MY COMP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.52.91 (talk) 07:44, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Not able to help with this. — Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

	United States National Archives WikiProject
	Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Might be interested if it intersects with topics of Supreme Court of the United States and/or Freedom of speech. — Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Just a heads up, Mickeymouse14 and EleanorShone look like socks of Hobnob1996. --Gyrobo (talk) 22:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Best to report this to

WP:SPI. — Cirt (talk

) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Best to report this to

WP:RFPP. — Cirt (talk

) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, could you please retrieve the text of the article Rhys O'Keeffe for me. It was deleted on notability after he was de-listed from the Carlton Football Club without playing a game; however, he was re-drafted and is now close to playing a senior game and gaining notability. I would like to prepare the article off-line, to be uploaded quickly when and if he plays. Thank you. Aspirex (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I would be most willing to provide this within a subpage of your userspace, if you so request it. :) — Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to make subpages of things, but if you just put it into my profile page or talk page that will be fine. Thanks. Aspirex (talk) 01:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Aspirex/Rhys O'Keeffe. — Cirt (talk) 23:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Cheers Aspirex (talk) 01:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, — Cirt (talk) 01:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Please see here for further details. On behalf of the arbitration committee, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC).

Thanks for the notice. — Cirt (talk) 23:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi i have recreated Mani Nouri article as i have asked you the persmission before. thank you in advance. --Irancinemairan (talk) 08:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Was previously deleted at

WP:DRV. — Cirt (talk

) 18:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The article had some changes and it had no problem. I had to inform you before the recreation and i did that. I don't understand why you deleted the article instantly. If there is anything to do before recreation, please provide me with some information, consultation with who? and etc. and If it is possible please let the article be there for some time and then decide about it. Thanks. --Irancinemairan (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The version didn't really appear better or significantly different. I would be most willing to userfy a copy for you, so you can work on it within a subpage of your userspace, if you so request it. :) — Cirt (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The version is really different with more reliable sources. I also modified the career part. It would be really nice if you could give it a chance to be there and if there is anything that you think i should change or remove, i would be glad to take your advice. Because i really changed a lot for this version and i only took some of names that the last creator had put there. And what is userfy a copy and what can i do with that..? :) --Irancinemairan (talk) 05:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I have provided it as a userfied copy, at User:Irancinemairan/Mani Nouri. — Cirt (talk) 04:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Cirt, i saw it. But can i put it on wikipedia directly in the future? Or what should i do with it, edit it and modify it and then put it on ? Thanks again. --Irancinemairan (talk) 08:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cirt, further to our recent discussions, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cirt.

I am sorry this has become necessary. You are an immensely capable and talented editor, but I feel that your allegiance to various outside causes exceeds your allegiance to the project's mission, as defined by the Foundation; that this has compromised the project's standing; and that it has caused many editors who care very much about this project to question its integrity.

I hope this RfC/U and the discussions resulting from it will help us to move forward, will enable you to re-evaluate why you are here, and will help us get back on track to work towards the aims all of us signed up for: creating an online encyclopedia, in comradeship and mutual respect, committed to a neutral point of view, authored with respect for living persons, based on accurate distillation of high-quality sources, and devoted to the aim of giving every single person on the planet free access to the sum of all human knowledge. Best, --JN466 13:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I commented on a fact here. Bearian (talk) 17:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt. You recently deleted a page I'd listed at Afd -

Personally, with that slow rate of creation (particularly with no recreation after an AfD), and when the editor who created the last three versions,

Bencherlite^Talk

00:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll defer to the wise judgment of

Bencherlite (talk · contribs) here. — Cirt (talk

) 17:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I contacted you a month ago about an AfD outcome since you were the closing administrator. Recently, the RfC I requested per your suggestion has expired after the 30 days given and I believe that there is a clear consensus to merge and redirect as I proposed. I would like to know what should I do in order to close the discussion and proceed to merge the content and redirect the article. As I am the one that proposed the merge in the first place, I feel that it might not be appropriate for me to close the discussion and I do not want to proceed until I'm sure that the process has been properly followed. So, should I proceed immediately with the merge and redirect or should I wait for some other process? Jfgslo (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I suggest requesting an uninvolved admin closer at WP:Administrators' noticeboard, per WP:Merging#Proposing a merger, box IV. See User:Shooterwalker's request at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive224#need neutral admin to close discussion. Flatscan (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the suggestion by Flatscan (talk · contribs), good idea. — Cirt (talk) 17:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks to both of you for your quick replies. Jfgslo (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) — Cirt (talk) 03:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

We note you have made reference to A2Billing at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trixbox#A2Billing.

However, we note that the A2Billing link does not link anywhere. As the page maintainer, may we assist you to write some more information on A2Billing. Your help would be appreciated.

Joe Roper, A2Billing. Foxcote20 (talk) 12:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest discussing with talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, and trying to find some neutral previously uninvolved editors to discuss this with on talk pages. — Cirt (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

What's up? I've recreated the The Hex Girls article that you deleted. I've added 5 sources to it. Hope that helps. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, doesn't really look significantly different/improved enough yet. I'd suggest working on it in userspace, I could provide you a copy of that if you want. — Cirt (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Really? Delete voters said things like "everything lacks verifiability with no references" so I would think adding 5 reliable sources like mainstream newspapers would be a significant improvement over zero references. You don't think so? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Improved, yes. Not really enough though. I'd suggest working on a userfied version, and I'd be more than happy to provide that for you. — Cirt (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, well I'm not really familiar or comfortable with that. So, I guess if you as an admin think it is best to delete that article with 5 sources because people said there are zero sources, than who am I to suggest we waste any further time arguing with that kind of logic. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I've provided it for you as a draft version for you to work on in your userspace, at User:Sharksaredangerous/The Hex Girls. — Cirt (talk) 18:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

No thanks, I'm not interested in further wasting my time. If my adding the New York Times, LA Times, Entertainment Weekly, Hollywood Reporter, etc. isn't an improvement and doesn't counter the argument that there are "no references" than I really have no clue what I'm doing here. Go ahead and delete that one, too. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'll leave it up there for a while in case you change your mind and wish to improve it further. — Cirt (talk) 18:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

No thanks, just delete it please. I'm not wasting any more time on it. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Feel free to let me know if you want to work on it further as a userspace draft version, I'll be glad to restore it. — Cirt (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. You've been very helpful. Here's another idea: Could you maybe add a note beyond just "The result was delete" to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hex Girls that maybe explains why you think adding 5 sources doesn't overcome the arguments for deletion? That would reallly help give me and other editors some useful guidance before we think about wasting all day doing periodical searches at the library in the future. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

That is now  Done. — Cirt (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, you've been a great help. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 19:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! — Cirt (talk) 19:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

For Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brilliant Disguise (Law & Order), you said there was no consensus. Could you please explain how there was no consensus? I'm not sure I understand how an article with no references, which is non-notable, and has no reliable veriable sources can have "no consensus." Isn't there consensus that it is not verifiable and therefore not encyclopedic? --Rajah (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, between those advocating for keep, merge, redirect, etc, there really was not much consensus there. But I'd encourage you to take further merge discussion, to the article's talk page. — Cirt (talk) 00:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I notice that a few hours ago you closed the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kimberly Proctor as delete; however, that AfD had two articles nominated. It also included discussion for deletion of Kruse Wellwood. I see that the AfD template is still on the Kruse Wellwood article. I assume you concluded that both articles should be deleted. Cheers, Agent 86 (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. — Cirt (talk) 06:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Apparently the Nixon Library does have some stuff, but the finding aid is outdated. The newer one will hopefully be emailed to me soon. I've asked them to tentatively reserve me some time to look at the materials next week, fortunately I will be in the LA area. I'm sure there will be clippings if nothing else. Nixon saved everything when it came to documents.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I've just gotten the finding aid by email. Nixon saved his research, memos to fellow lawyers ... very extensive. Of course, we can use only some of it, but I'll go through it at the Nixon Library on Monday.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, great, I'll get going on creating a page with some secondary sources. — Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I doubt there will be much by way of images that we can use but perhaps I can scan the cover of the brief, which was certainly not copyrighted.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I've been spending some time this afternoon reading through some of Nixon's file in the Hill case. Most interesting indeed. The case eventually settled after the NY Ct of Appeals was reversed by the nine, and there's a memorandum about how much the plaintiffs got, which was not publicly announced, I scanned that for our use (around $60K each, which was probably the equivalent of a half mil today). Not much by the way of images, but as I said, the brief covers can be used. They were published pre 1978 without copyright notice.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Thought I had something interesting, a letter from Stanley Reed to Nixon congratulating him on his argument, on SCOTUS stationary. But Reed was retired, so it wasn't improper (there was a letter from Nixon which prompted it).--Wehwalt (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Update: Still working on a draft page to create, got three good sources for some initial background. Just gotta flesh it out a bit more. Also working on the infobox formatting, which is unique for Supreme Court of the United States cases. Will post it soon. :) — Cirt (talk) 16:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

I was hoping you could review the recent source addition I made to my draft page below. The article I added is a reliable source that references The Futuristics so I'm hoping I can make it a public article. Please let me know if this is OK. Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DerekAC7/The_Futuristics

New source: http://www.djbooth.net/index/tracks/review/game-pot-of-gold/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerekAC7 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Hrm, does not really look yet like enough secondary source coverage. Also, it'd be easier to analyze if the references were formatted. Try reading

WP:CIT templates. — Cirt (talk

) 02:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok will do thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.155.161 (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, I do think it needs a little protection, seeing the slow vandalism that's been going on. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I requested it, at

WP:RFPP. We'll see. — Cirt (talk

) 19:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Would you be able to unlock the page Just Kait, so a redirect can be created for Kaitlyn DiBenedetto? thanks. Tinton5 (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Best to request at

WP:RFPP. — Cirt (talk

) 19:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest posting this question to a new section at

WT:GAN. — Cirt (talk

) 01:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine page? Please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.219.133 (talk) 01:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Deleted through

WP:AFD process, discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine. — Cirt (talk

) 01:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps it does have OTRS permission, but it is still an advert no? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

That's for the normal Wikipedia community processes to determine. Feel free to take appropriate further steps. — Cirt (talk) 05:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts:

• Regarding
  CSD tag that the author removed. I left a note
  on the author's talk page, recommending that he follow the process and not delete CSD tags from his own article.
• Regarding the article itself, my inclination with a new article is generally to do what I can to clean it up to meet minimal standards, e.g., James H. Lincoln. When an article, such as Immunome Research has so many
  notability
  guidelines):

1. Promotional
   in tone and content
2. Essentially a copy/paste from the website
3. Written by someone with an admitted
   conflict of interest: [31]
   "s the author is associated with the journal being discussed ... as the first scientific journal in the field of Immunomics, it seems relevant to include the journal in the encyclopedia"
4. I'm not sure it even merits inclusion in
   WP:JOURNALS
   - it is not peer reviewed (so far as I can see), and doesn't have any paper distribution (admittedly, not a sole factor for exclusion).

If CSD is declined, I'll nominate it at

WP:AFD

. Either it is worthy of someone spending time to cleanup (I don't think so, at this point), or it is not.

Cheers, JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking a little deeper, the following makes me think the Journal in question is notable. It is just that the current article is a promotional piece, as written: [32].

Copied the foregoing to Talk:Immunome Research#Keep or delete this article, as this seems a better place to continue this discussion about the article. I hope this is OK. JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

• The above plan sounds appropriate, no objections. — Cirt (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Howdy. Which ticket can I reference for this? Regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh it's this one [33]. — Cirt (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

From time to time... I miss the obvious. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Heh, no worries, — Cirt (talk) 11:50, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! It's great to see work appreciated :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! — Cirt (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cirt Could you please restore the content of the above page in my user space? I intend to provide reliable sources regarding the significance of this group in creating a peace movement on the island of Cyprus. I also intend to merge its content with another article on Wikipedia, which discussed a major activity of this group. Maryafrika (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at

User:Maryafrika/Cyprus Conflict Resolution Trainers Group. — Cirt (talk

) 11:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cirt, thank you very much for restoring the content of the above page in my user space. I have now completed the edits and moved the article. I would greatly appreciate if you invest a moment to review it and let me know if you think it needs more work. Maryafrika (talk) 07:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mondlango. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiwaxia (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the notice. — Cirt (talk) 14:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Cirt. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion.
Message added 15:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ron Ritzman (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. — Cirt (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cirt, I'm not sure why you need help closing FPo discussions and carrying out the promotion steps - you are, after all, a FPo director and the list of closing instructions is quite clear. In fact, you left your message more than 24 hours after I last edited, and more than 48 hours have passed since then, which is hardly an ideal situation. From my watchlist, I see that the portal's nominator has made a start on finishing your half-started job, which is good of him but not something that he should have to do. I would have thought that it would have been sensible either to ask me first whether I wanted to help do your job for you, or do the job yourself once you realised that I hadn't edited for some time after your message. However, as I note that you're not online at the moment (perhaps because of July 4, I know not) I'll see what steps still need doing and finish off for you. Perhaps next time you might want to ask your fellow FPo director to assist if I'm not online. I'm not annoyed, by the way, just slightly puzzled. Regards,

In fact,

Bencherlite^Talk

11:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification about this. I'd seen in the past that you were quite happy for me or other featured portal directors to perform some steps, and for you to carry out others. Your view appears to have changed. As far as timing, don't see it as a urgent process, or an emergency, or a crisis, for some steps to not be done for a short period of time. — Cirt (talk) 14:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

In fact, OhanaUnited has never asked me to clerk his closures for him - only you have done, and there are no other FPo Directors. I don't mind helping every so often, and I have done a good deal of tidying up of pages connected to the FPo processes without being asked, but asking me to finish your to-do list seemingly every time you promote a portal is perhaps unusual behaviour for a FxC director. (Also you're increasing the number of steps you leave for me e.g. in February it was only the last step you wanted me to do because you found it "annoying", this time it was nearly everything.) I think that it's the closer's responsibility to take the necessary steps, whether at FPoC or elsewhere (and, for the record, I have closed discussions at FPoC and FSC, and FLC a long time ago, so I speak from experience: all of them have a number of annoying aspects!)

As for whether or not it's urgent to take all the necessary steps, obviously urgent/emergency/crisis are all relative terms (and are all your words, not mine) but if you don't leave a note on the nomination that it has been closed as successful, and don't complete all the other steps, people may be confused as to what is going on until the bot processes the close and adds the star - see this question from

Bencherlite^Talk

15:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Ideally it would be best for a bot to perform all steps except for the first 2. — Cirt (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I know, there's a fair amount of tedious stuff there... Would

Bencherlite^Talk

15:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Will ask. And thanks! — Cirt (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete the following page: Arif_Khan_(politician) ???

He's the upcoming candidate for an Alberta riding in the next provincial election, and the public needs to know this information. I included three external references, what more do you need?

Thanks, -- Jasen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasenator (talk • contribs) 16:12, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Was deleted through

WP:AFD process, after discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arif Khan (politician). — Cirt (talk

) 16:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I was going to start a drv for this article but I noticed first line is to discuss with deleting admin. Two issues with this deletion, one is that I believe it to be notable, however that is up for debate if I had a chance to comment. I have this article on my watch list however no changes had made other that deletion in the recent period. I suspect therefore the article did NOT have an AFD tag on it, and thus there was no AFD discussion. Regards,

 Done. Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

my apology. I see it was tagged for AFD on June 27th. So I guessed I missed that. Regards,

talk

) 23:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries, — Cirt (talk) 03:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi

I think you may have missed

 Done! — Cirt (talk) 03:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

How are you doing Cirt? Hey can you give me a list of the Savage books, for which I haven't given you the Book sales? Sorry for being late. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, not editing those articles anymore. — Cirt (talk) 13:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, due to recent events a request for arbitration has been filed by ResidentAnthropologist (talk · contribs) regarding long standing issues in the "Cult" topic area. The request can be found at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Cults The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 07:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. — Cirt (talk) 13:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

What's up? As you might recall we had a previous discussion about your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hex Girls as delete. To reiterate, I thought that in light of the sources I'd found and added to the article, that concerns about lack of sources had been met and "the most drastic action needed here is at most maybe a merge to another Scooby-Doo related article, but certainly not complete deletion." However, other editors and yourself disagreed and thought deletion was the best outcome and you deleted it. But I see today that some other editor(s) has merged Hex Girls information into List of Scooby-Doo characters.[34] My first instinct after seeing this was to turn the The Hex Girls article you deleted into a redirect to List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters#The_Hex_Girls and then improve upon the section there, however I can see how that could be seen as disregarding the AFD consensus since this recommendation was rejected there, and I can see how this could turn into another gigantic waste of my time after it all gets deleted again. So, I thought I'd come here first and ask: Do you have a problem with me turning The Hex Girls into a redirect of List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters#The_Hex_Girls and improving that section? That is, can I now go ahead and work on my recommendation to "merge to another Scooby-Doo related article" even though that suggestion was rejected? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest you start a new section at the talk page of List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters to address that. — Cirt (talk) 17:08, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Are you going to address my question there? My question is pretty specific to you: Do you have a problem with this? Are you going to delete that redirect if I create it? Are you going to delete work I'm considering putting into List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters#The_Hex_Girls? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

My answer is nope to all those things, I don't have a problem with it, I won't delete it the redirect, or your work. But it's an editorial decision at this point, and can only be helped by having discussion at Talk:List of Scooby-Doo characters. Good luck! :) — Cirt (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 19:42, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries, — Cirt (talk) 19:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I see that you closed the deletion discussion for Discrete Green's theorem. However, the article still exists under the title of Antiderivative theorem. The author of the first changed its title multiple times during the AfD hoping to satisfy those who complained that he had, personally, coined the term "Discrete Green's theorem". Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 20:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done! — Cirt (talk) 22:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt - I know this was a long time ago, but the FAR you began for Rebecca Helferich Clarke appears to be wrapping up. If you have any final comments, they would be appreciated. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done! — Cirt (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

You deleted Static Latching per WP:Articles for deletion/Static Latching. Unfortunately, subsequent to being nominated for deletion, the article was moved to Static latching. You deleted the redirect page, but not the actual article that was the subject of the deletion discussion. Can you address this? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done! — Cirt (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Cheers!

Bearian (talk) 16:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! :) — Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! You have deleted a page entitled "Deborah Presley Brando", she was married to Christian Brando, elder child of actor Marlon Brando. here is an internal link to her husband Christian, where you can see it's talking about her in the marriage section. Christian_Brando , Christian_Brando Could we start an article about her based on that? thx Antonio --Antoniomecheri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniomecheri (talk • contribs) 23:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it? — Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

How do you request it?thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniomecheri (talk • contribs) 01:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Antoniomecheri/Deborah Presley Brando. — Cirt (talk) 01:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

So why is she mentioned on wikipedia's Christian Brando's article, in the content "marriage and spousal abuse?", that could be considered as nonsense too! and she has a million "mainstream media" good and verifiable sources all over Print and internet. what makes someone notable? Her claim was overturned by the Tenessee courts from non illigitimate to illigitimate but without inheritance rights. please, do your homework before concluding. thx — Also, you have a page about Bonnie Lee Bakley, which was the wife of Robert Blake, Bonnie_Lee_Bakley,Bonnie_Lee_Bakley who based on your arguments she does not qualify as notable by marriage, (same case as Deborah Presley Brando)!!! or by inheritance, but yet you have a page of her ??? why are you discriminating here? a similar article can be written about Deborah, yet she is more notable than Bonnie, that i can tell you. check it out!---Antoniomecheri (talk) 01:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest you read through

WP:CITE. — Cirt (talk

) 01:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, --Antoniomecheri (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) — Cirt (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

1. The First Amendment Project
2. The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
3. The People vs. Larry Flynt
4. Gideon's Trumpet (film)
5. Obscene (2007 documentary)

Some interesting films about

) 01:12, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Freedom of speech - Userbox idea, possible WikiProject idea

This user is currently working on Category:Freedom of speech.

Userbox idea, possible WikiProject idea. — Cirt (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speech. — Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

1. Wikipedia:WikiProject
2. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council
3. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide
4. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

— Cirt (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

This is the first time I am writing to you directly. I'd like to say that I see no reason why you would remove the wiki page for ActionTrip.com. The terms some of your admins/editors used to describe ActionTrip.com were "completely unreferenced" and "Just some website with no independent reliable sources." There's clearly some unfounded doubt about credibility here. In response to this, I've offered some of examples of our long history - numerous quotes, links to features, and such, just to give you a rough idea of what the site is about.

- A news excerpt from BioWare's official site for Mass Effect 3! Here's the URL - http://www.bioware.com/archive/mass-effect-3

   Quote:
   02.14.2011
   Mass Effect 3 is Most Wanted by Action Trip
   The fans over at Action Trip were asked to name the games they are most excited for in 2011. The game that came in first? Mass Effect 3!
   Here's the URL to our voting poll - http://www.actiontrip.com/polls.phtml?showpoll=133

- Next, a quote on Bethesda's official web site for Fallout 3 - ActionTrip: "Molding together the retro-style tactical mechanics from Fallout and action-oriented gameplay is no easy task. For now, it all works rather well." - the is from our 2008 E3 Coverage (http://www.actiontrip.com/features/e32008fallout3.phtml).

- Two quotes on BioWare's official web site for Dragon Age Origins here's the URL - http://dragonage.bioware.com/dao/home/accolades/

  Action Trip - 2009 Reader's Choice Game of the Year
  "With a well-written storyline, great atmosphere and old-school RPG gameplay, this title justifies every penny of its $60 price tag."

  Action Trip - 2009 Reader's Choice Game of the Year
  "The game has all the elements you need to immerse yourself in an interesting new fantasy setting."

ActionTrip's comics garnerned tremendous attention, on various topics. Here are some of our successful comics.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/14/weekly-webcomic-wrapup-is-mourning-cathy/ http://wow.joystiq.com/tag/action-trip/

These are just a few examples. Comics were generally a great success and now have a history on AT. We've been posting them for over seven years. Our Warcraft-related comics were also acknowledged both by Blizzard and WoW fans. Here's another example of a successful AT Comic, which was drawn for a competition for Alienware - http://www.futuremark.com/community/competitions/comicstripcompetition/

ActionTrip comics are also featured regularly on MMORPG.com (in the comics section - http://www.mmorpg.com/comics.cfm). In addition, Kotaku.com - one of the most popular video game blogs today - includes our comics in their Sunday Comics update - http://kotaku.com/sunday-comics. Here's an older update, just so you know we've been included in their comics section for a long time - http://kotaku.com/5317186/sunday-comics

On wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_IV - Play.tm has given the game its "Action game of the Year" award for 2008.

                                               - Action Trip has given the game its "Action game of the Year" award for 2008.
                                               - MTV Game Awards has given the game its "Game of the Year" award for 2008.

References in the world of warcraft wiki page:

^ a b c Matt Leyendecker (2004-12-01). "World of Warcraft Review". ActionTrip. Retrieved 2008-06-25. - World of Warcraft wiki page linking to our review of World of Warcraft.

ActionTrip reviews have been included and quoted on prominent sites such as Gamerankings.com and Metacritic.com We've also been known to appear in Kotaku's Frankereview - http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/frankenreview-halo-3-o-d-s-t/ Gamespot also lists us on their web site - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/haloreach/review.html?mode=web

ActionTrip has also covered major events such as the E3 and Games Convetion in Leipzig (now in Koln), Germany. And has recievied plenty of media coverage from other various publications; quotes from industry veterans such as Gabe Newell were taken from AT - http://www.actiontrip.com/features/gc2007gabenewellinterview.phtml

Similar features on AT include talking to influential people in the industr such as the creator of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed - http://www.actiontrip.com/previews/360/star-wars-the-force-unleashed_i.phtml

One of the most important things you should be aware of is that ActionTrip.com has been a part of the gaming community for over 10 years. We have a solid fan base and respectable traffic. Our success has been acknowledged in 2005, when we were purchased by one of the larger US-based ad sales rep firms, Gorilla Nation (now Evolve Media). The site eventually grew into a multi-million monthly page view operation. The regularly updated ActionTrip Facebook page has 3,420 "likes" at present.

To cut I long story short, the deleted Wiki page for ActionTrip.com was submitted by a devoted fan and we quite liked it. Even so, I respectfully ask you to reconsider and allow me to submit a brand new Wiki Page for ActionTrip. Note that this message is just to give you an idea of what we've done over the years. So, once again, I ask you to allow me to submit a new Wiki page for AT.

Best regards, Ure "Vader" Paul Senior Editor, ActionTrip.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ure Vader Paul (talk • contribs) 14:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The deletion discussion was at

WP:NOTE. I'm perfectly happy to do that for you, if you so request it. :) — Cirt (talk

) 15:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Cirt. Yes, that sounds good. Let's set up this page and I'd very much appreciate it if you do that. Just so, we're clear on this, this means that you'll copy the old AT Wiki Page and then allow me to edited it on my user page. Is that correct? Ure Vader Paul (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Ure Vader Paul/ActionTrip. — Cirt (talk) 19:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, Cirt, as agreed I've created a draft version, re-edited the content, and it's very much ready to go - User:Ure Vader Paul/ActionTrip. I hope it meets with Wiki's approval. Let me know when it's up as the official ActionTrip Wiki Page. Oh and I'd like to include a logo (small pic) for ActionTrip in the Infobox, if at all possible. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 12:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

No, there are still sects that have zero sources at all. Also, please format the cites with

Fair enough, I'll see what I can do about that. Thanks for your time and patience. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Alrighty, I've tried to add as many references as I possibly could. Please let me know, if some specific information still doesn't meet your requirements. If the section "Other Features" is the problem, I can edit that out. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 01:42, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Not satisfactory, as per my prior comment. Still has wholly unreferenced sects. Still has cites that should be formatted, please read

WP:CIT templates. Thank you, — Cirt (talk

) 13:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I am writing you in the hope that you will undelete the entry Employment Law Alliance. My reasoning is based on several issues: 1) Page in question was recently brought into compliance with respect to the addition of numerous third-party references both a) confirming the identity of the organization; and b) highlighting polls done by the organization which, in and of themselves, meet the definition of notable. 2) If you review the page's content you will see that no content is intended to be promotional or construed as an advertisement. This organization is identical in nature to that of an alliance of airlines such as the Star alliance. Timestaking efforts to ensure that the page was in compliance were made. A claim that somehow this is similar to a situation where "a sells concrete and b pours it" overly simplistic. By this logic, when Delta sells a plane ticket and a person flies on a partner airline then a similar situation occurs. And yet, Delta's airline alliance page is not called in to question. Please reconsider this deletion. Mabond17 (talk) 23:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it? — Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

You plan sounds good and I greatly appreciate your willingness to work with me on this. I apologize for my ignorance, but what do I need to do to userfy the page? I was looking on the entry for userfy and it seemed to indicate that you, as an administrator, could do it. Please lte me know. Thanks again. Mabond17 (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at

User:Mabond17/Employment Law Alliance. — Cirt (talk

) 18:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

1. Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment, by Anthony Lewis
2. Freedom, Technology, and the First Amendment, by Jonathan W. Emord
3. Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting our First Amendment Liberties, by Christopher M. Fairman
4. Contested Words: Legal Restrictions on Freedom of Speech in Liberal Democracies, by Ian Cram
5. The First Amendment in Cross-Cultural Perspective: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Freedom of Speech, by Ronald J. Krotoszynski

A few intriguing books on

Added some more. — Cirt (talk) 15:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, I had messaged 2 other wiki administrators for help with this page and had no response and i see you have deleted the page i constructed for knomo. i spent hours and hours improving the tone and trying to find citations that make the page notable and verifiable etc and was hoping for more direction from the admins as everything seemed to be in-line with the Wiki rules - is there anything i can do to get the page back? Could you advise what was still needing to be remedied after all the changes i made previously? Many thanks in advance for any help you can give Caroline Mackay (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd be happy to provide a copy within a subpage of your userspace, so you can work on a proposed draft version to try to satisfy

WP:NOTE - if you request that. — Cirt (talk

) 14:14, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

1. {{WikiProject Human rights}}
2. {{WikiProject Internet}}
3. {{WikiProject Journalism}}
4. {{WikiProject Law}}
5. {{WikiProject Media}}
6. {{WikiProject Politics}}
7. {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
8. {{WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases}}

WikiProjects - related to Freedom of speech and Freedom of the press. — Cirt (talk) 15:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

I am hoping that you can userfy a copy of the Day Pitney article that was deleted January 25, 2011. I would like the opportunity to improve the content so that it's in compliance with Wikipedia's content policies.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tabajek (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC) tabajek

 Done, now at User:Tabajek/Day Pitney. — Cirt (talk) 17:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

can you please send me a page that was deleted by you few days ago about "Pharmex Rom Industry". I would really apreacheate any comment. this is my mail: [email protected]

thanks, david — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.211.45 (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but I'd suggest you first create an account on Wikipedia. Then, you could have a userfied copy, within a subpage of your userspace. — Cirt (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

FYI The Mister World article went to AFD and you recently closed the AFD but the articles arising from the main article still remained. If the main article (Mister World) was deleted is it okay for the subarticles to exist in wiki (ie: Mister World 1996, Mister World 1998, Mister World 2000, Mister World 2003, Mister World 2007, Mister World 2010? --Arielle Leira (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

You should probably bundle all those into another AFD. — Cirt (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

1. Free Speech Coalition
2. Free Speech Radio News
3. Free Speech Movement
4. Free Speech TV
5. SPEECH Act of 2010

— Cirt (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Millice. BigJim707 (talk) 04:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice! :) — Cirt (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Time, Inc. v. Hill

I have created a new article on the U.S. Supreme Court case, Time, Inc. v. Hill. Feedback and especially help with additional research would be appreciated, at the new article's talk page. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

This AfD was just reopened and relisted yesterday by the previously closing admin per discussion here and here. It's drawn exactly one new comment. None of the existing keep !votes states a policy basis, which was the reason it was reopened. I think you should undo this close. Msnicki (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Restored AFD tag to page. Relisted AFD. Back at AFD. :) — Cirt (talk) 13:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Msnicki (talk) 13:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! — Cirt (talk) 14:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Why does this guy keep getting this relisted? Just because he doesn't like the outcome? Please, experienced editors have weighed in for keeping it - just close the thing and move on already - this constant closing and reopening based on the complaints of the one editor is getting ridiculous. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

It's most likely to not be deleted anyways. — Cirt (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Exactly - it's been closed twice now as "keep" - let's close it for good and be done with it. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Right, therefore no harm will come from more discussion. — Cirt (talk) 18:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

How do you feel about the RFC views by Macwhiz? I think it would be helpful for you to post a specific, point by point response either accepting or denying criticisms and stating what you would do differently going forward. This process will work best if you remain engaged. Jehochman ^Talk 14:37, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

As there is now an ongoing RFAR, it seems more appropriate to respond there. I've gone ahead and done so, diff. — Cirt (talk) 18:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, i would like to add the five FBI audio files to the following section of the 1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot article.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Rajneeshee_assassination_plot#Investigation

However, i am not quite certain about what the appropriate template for multiple audio files would be. I would appreciate it if you would help me out in this regard. The accompanying caption should be as follows:

Conversations between

Victor G. Atiyeh

.

Thanks.

Can this discussion take place at the article's talk page? — Cirt (talk) 08:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Moved discussion to

Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!}

09:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! :) — Cirt (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey!

I'm cheking out information about Bloom Consulting, and just saw that page about owner Jose Filipe Torres had been deleted now for three times, I already read all arguments why it had been done and now situation is changed, he is worldwide knewed person, there is a lot of articles about him and his company, it would be usuful to add information about him in wikipedia, if only it's possible to undelete it, to make it work again, or maybe it's possible to make new page about him? What you suggest?

Best regards, Marta Martaliepa (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

It was deleted after the process described at

WP:NOTE. — Cirt (talk

) 15:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But if it's not me who wants add the content to page, I just want to make page work again, or it should be me who add also content...if I understand correctly I should put tag WP:NOTE and then you can verify the content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martaliepa (talk • contribs) 16:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, unfortunately the prior content was deemed unsatisfactory of the guidelines at

WP:NOTE. No, tagging the deleted page won't help really. You can either work on the page yourself as a draft proposed version in your userspace, or perhaps post to talk pages of related WikiProjects for help. — Cirt (talk

) 16:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But maybe it's possible to make just new page, but with the same title? Or it doesn't work like this? Martaliepa (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Really best to first work on it as a proposed draft version, not yet in main article space. — Cirt (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I think I get idea, I will try to do that.. if smth I will be back here :) Thank you for information. Martaliepa (talk) 16:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at

User:Martaliepa/José Filipe Torres. — Cirt (talk

) 16:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the issues; I tried as noted at my talk page. Bearian (talk) 00:10, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much for information and good luck with your works ;) Martaliepa (talk) 10:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. — Cirt (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you please block 50.9.109.170 (talk) from the Cheney Mason article. Evidently, from what I gather, he removed the unfavorable fact of Mason's having allegedly extended his middle finger in an obscene manner, as photographed by an AP photographer, upon the acquittal of his client, Casey Anthony in the infamous murder trial; I just attempted to restore this, which involves the work of another user, but I'm afraid he'll remove it again. It's an infamous incident, and it needs to stay in here. Can you perhaps also lock the article, as I'm afraid it may be subject to further loss/vandalism; I'm a newbie, so I don't know how to do it. Diligent007 (talk) 05:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest reporting this to

WP:AIV. — Cirt (talk

) 14:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Portal:Supreme Court of the United States

Portal:Supreme Court of the United States is a candidate for Featured Portal, with discussion at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Supreme Court of the United States. — Cirt (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

Because I wasn't paying attention, the article regarding Kathy Chitty was nominated for deletion and then deleted. If I had noticed I would have put up a reasonable argument to keep it. It was nominated for deletion a year ago but kept. I feel that the points made then along with an up to date aurgument to keep it would probably have kept it. Is is a reasonable request ot have it reinstated and continue the debate? Thanks for your time. Rickedmo (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 05:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, thanks for that and thanks for the offer to userfy the article.

Over the last year the article had been edited quite a bit to get a balance between some (I think) noteworthy information about one of Paul Simon's muses who is mentioned in four of his songs, and protecting the current privacy of the muse. Some of the articles regarding the songs themselves had links to the Kathy Chitty article which are now broken. I could, of course, include the background information on the inspiration of the songs in the individual song articles, but as there are a number of songs - I think four - that refer to her, it seems the wrong way round to repeat the relavant information regarding Ms Chitty in each article - it seems more sensible to have an article about her that can be linked to. I can develop this argument further if required and would have done if I'd been paying attention when the article was nominated for deletion. I don't think the quality of the article was the main challenge, but the notability. I strongly feel she is sufficiently notable. Regards and thanks for your time. Rickedmo (talk) 12:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I understand, and I am giving you an opportunity to further improve the article, to add that information into it, improve its sourcing and references, etc. You are of course free to make your own decisions. — Cirt (talk) 15:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, thanks for that. Please userfy the article on Kathy Chitty. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 18:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at

User:Rickedmo/Kathy Chitty. — Cirt (talk

) 19:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, many thanks. I've had a read through the lastest verson, as deleted, and will make a few minor changes and search out some more references, but I can't see me making dramatic changes. But anyway, I'll do my best before reinstating it. Thanks again. Rickedmo (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. — Cirt (talk) 05:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Cirt, and thank you for putting a 31-hour block on the edit-warring anon IP 205.209.83.211. He now appears to be making the same contentious edits (which more than one editor has been reverting) under the name Worstcook (talk).

Worstcook's list of contributions mirrors that of 205.209.83.211, and here is one example of an identical edit and a near-identical edit summary:

• Worstcook Revision as of 22:12, 12 July 2011, summary: "(→Contestants: Please keep consistent with first season)"

• 205.209.83.211 Revision as of 00:47, 12 July 2011, summary: "(→Contestants: Make an episode chart also keep consistent with first season.)"

While I can open a sockpuppet investigation, I thought I'd check in with you first, since I know admins take a dim view of editors trying to evade blocks. Thank you for any help. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Just a word of support for Tenebrae's contentions. This account has been around for quite a while, but rarely used. A couple hours after you blocked the IP, it went active, and went right to List of The Great Food Truck Race episodes, the episode list for one of the articles the IP had been working on most actively. What's most noticeable is what's missing from both editors edits: edit summaries. Drmargi (talk) 02:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:SPI is probably the best way to go from here. — Cirt (talk

) 05:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for steering this in the right direction. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries, — Cirt (talk) 19:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello - I would like a second attempt at writing an article for Mark Gilmartin. It says you were the deleting admin. Please let me know what further action needs to be taken on my part, if applicable. Thank you very much. Joyprice7 (talk) 18:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Joyprice7/Mark Gilmartin. You can work on it there, to further improve it, as a proposed draft version. — Cirt (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)