User talk:Euryalus/Archive4

On 4 December 2008 you protected Jessica Simpson. Perhaps it is time to reconsider this indefinite protection? Debresser (talk) 11:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, in the spirit of "anyone can edit." Last time I did this the vandalism became excessive within hours, but am happy to give it another try given the passage of time. Euryalus (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You wrote it up as vandalism. But this is a new thing. Its a new adult toy working on. I'm trying to get it hyped up in the media so everyone buys one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazynips123 (talk • contribs) 22:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe that's correct. To quote

here. -- Euryalus (talk

) 22:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members	Editorial LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here .

This has been an automated delivery by

talk

) 18:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

A quick question on old delete

Hi Euryalus,

You deleted the article here "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Grenning" for the reason of "Signing this "manifesto", which is seems anyone can do."

Actually, not anyone can sign the manifesto.

The signing was an event that occurred only one time see (http://agilemanifesto.org/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_Manifesto) and is the basis of all Agile approaches you see today in Software Engineering (Scrum, Extreme Programming, Agile Estimation).

Based on your initial premise that anyone could sign the manifesto, I agree with your action of deleting the entry.

However, considering what I have mentioned here, I hope you would reconsider and undelete the article (note almost everyone that was there has an entry in wikipedia).

Regards,

Eric —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hosick (talk • contribs) 07:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The article text consisted entirely of "James Grenning was one of seventeen to sign the Agile Manifesto." It was deleted after a week with a

notability criteria

. The Manifesto itself might be notable, but notability is not inherited simply by association with notable things. Having reviewed the text (such as it is) I don't particularly support undeleting it in its current form.

That said, there's a few quite detailed stories on Grenning in online publications, which might be sufficient for an article on him, provided they are viable secondary sources. It's not my area of expertise, but if you know something about the field (or even if you just want to jump in and see how you go), please feel free to create a new version of the article having regard for the requirements for

verifiability

.

I've copied the old article to User:Hosick/James Grenning in case anything there is of use. Hope this helps, and good luck with it if you decide to create a new one.. Euryalus (talk) 07:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

This has been an automated delivery by

Hi, I wanted to write the profile of our organisation (Deesha Communications) which is already listed in dmoz and other good directories. You have just deleted the brief which I was writing on Deesha Communications.

Is it not allowed to write about an organisation so that people can come to know and use it.

Please guide me how such brief of the organisation can be uploaded.

Regards,

T.Roy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troy077 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for the note. There's no reason why you can't create an article on a company, but it needs to meet the notability requirements at

reliable sources

.

I have moved a copy of the deleted article to User:Troy077/Deesha so you can keep working on it. When it has an assertion of notability and sources to back it up, just use the "Move" tab at the top of your page to send the article back to its original heading.

Hope this is helpful. Let me know if I haven't explained the problem, or if I can help in any other way. Euryalus (talk) 12:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Euryalus. You have new messages at Bubbamickmac's talk page.
Message added 04:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies ^talk 21:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The article was redirected per this because it lacked referencing and notability. The creator of it asked that it be userfied so s/he could work on referencing and notability before reposting to the main encyclopedia. As the deleting admin I agreed to the userfication here, so referencing and notability could potentially be addressed.

I am not therefore a contributor to the article, substantial or otherwise. Instead, could I suggest that rather than notifying me you notify User:Burgeian, as the article is in his namespace and in fairness he deserves a chance to offer his views. Euryalus (talk) 12:34, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not a content dispute when a vandal is adding hoax information to an article, it's vandalism. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Full protection isn't necessary. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection would have blocked one side of the debate and not the other. I've left a message on the article talk page requesting anyone with an interest make a comment there so a consensus can be reached. The protection is also only for 24 hours, so if the information is wrong, it won't last long. plus, I notice you were the last editor before the protection so presumably the current version is one you prefer. Euryalus (talk) 02:17, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of vandalism is not edit warring. Did you even read what the IP was adding? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. But again, the protection is not an endorsement of your version or theirs. It is to stop the article being constantly changed back and forth, without either party discussing it on the talk page. Euryalus (talk) 02:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Claiming that I was edit warring is an endorsement of your claim that I was not editing properly. I repeat: vandal fighting is not edit warring. Yes, you protected at the most recent version, which is mine, but you besmirch my name by claiming I was edit warring. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Could_somebody_please_clear_my_name.3F. Everard Proudfoot (talk)

Thanks for letting me know. Euryalus (talk) 02:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised at the total protection of

Answered above - I'm not taking sides one way or the other. Semi-protection would only have prevented edits by one side of the edit war. The protection is a) short and b) by chance, in the version preferred by the registered editor rather than the IP. Euryalus (talk) 02:18, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Plus, if there's a firm consensus one way or the other befire the 24 hours expires, let me know and I will lift the protection entirely. Euryalus (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I just backed it down to semi, because it's really blatantly obvious that the IP's edits were not constructive. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 02:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Fine by me, and on closer examination I agree re the tables for the future shows. Euryalus (talk) 03:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Did you discuss this edit with the IP before reverting them? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

For info. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm as confused as you are. the ip edits were obviously vandalism. I'm not sure how it got to this. I was on Huggle at the time, and didn't really care about it. I just treated it as good (bad?) old vandalism. not sure what to do now. :/--Talktome^(Intelati) 03:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Dunno. Clearly the protection was a mistake, though in good faith. Hopefully others will see it that way, though signs aren't promising. Anyway, mistake reverted and the matter seems (or should be) closed. Sorry to have troubled you, and back to regular editing :) Euryalus (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Have a burger for your trouble:)--Talktome^(Intelati) 05:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Talktome^(Intelati) has given you a Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!

Spread the goodness of Cheeseburgers by adding {{subst:Cheeseburger}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Heh. Thanks. Euryalus (talk) 05:17, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

[copied from User talk:David Levy]

For info. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I just left a note. —

David Levy

14:17, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Please don't give up on Wikipedia. I know you thought you were doing what was right, though I severly disagreed with you. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 05:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Not forever, just a while. I've previously approached this kind of thing with greater caution, but recently my editing time has been more restricted, and I think this is a consequence of not spending enough time thinking before acting. So - no hard feelings, no storming off in a huff, just some time spent reading rather than writing and a return to taking things more slowly and accurately. Glad to see you're back too, by the way. Euryalus (talk) 06:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Bacon#Participants
  !
• You may also feel free to add the userbox - {{User Bacon}} - to your userpage, to indicate your participation in the WikiProject.
• The
  User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011
  .

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 08:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section talk ) 21:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

"Moral Unblock"

Hi,

This is User_talk:86.178.141.82 here. I'm only on your talk page reluctantly, because I have no way of answering you otherwise. I guess I need to ask first if you're willing to hear me out before I answer you. If you are I'll be checking this periodically and will do so, as I already have the 3 edits ready :) 86.174.109.119 (talk) 21:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

P.S. It is of course possible you're not logged on. If you neither reply nor make an edit after 2 hours I will make the 3 edits then ask some administrators what they think. 86.174.109.119 (talk) 21:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

P.P.S. Heh, last post scriptum... I'm obviously not blocked at all at the moment. But I want to play by the rules, as aspergic as they may be, if possible. Hence my edits confined to here for the moment. 86.174.109.119 (talk) 21:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

Your Military history Newsletter Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section

talk

) 22:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Blackbeard/Archive 1

Template:Blackbeard/Archive 1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Parrot of Doom 09:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, do you mean Talk:Blackbeard/Archive1? If so, merging with the Cluebot version seems administratively fine. Euryalus (talk) 22:30, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section

talk

) 22:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar, you're very kind. Also, thanks for picking up the unsourced BLP template I left behind here.  -- Lear's Fool 21:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for adding references to the Loreto Kirribilli notable alumnae section. :) I had thought that deleting all unreferenced [[1]] was a bit hasty, so I'm glad that someone had the time to go through and fix up some references. Cheers. -danjel (talk to me) 02:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

No probelms. I did remove two - Patt Short because I couldn't find any evidnece of notability, even by the lower standards of

WP:NLIST, and the Irish comedian Katherine Lynch who doesn't appear to have attended Loreto at all. But I agree with your action in reverting the deletion and adding citation tags - the list is not an especially BLP-sensitive issue, and deleting them kind of reduced the level of info in the article. Euryalus (talk

) 05:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The big merge

Hey Euryalus. Just wanted to touch base with you, I'm imagining what the task force page might look like and thought it would be good to chat about it before my imaginings got too involved. Do you have any feelings on using the "look and feel" of the maritime trades page as a starting point? We could certainly add/remove/spruce up as we see fit...

Two other items are knocking around in the back of my head: 1) notifying folks that have signed up for either project, and 2) starting a new version of the transport header that would support 1 or more task forces (

Haus^Talk

21:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I have to say I like the Maritime Trades page better than the WP:PORTS one - I largely assembled the latter from some standard designs used elsewhere, and it is more functional than attractive. I'd be happy for the Maritime Trades layout to be continued as a template for a merged design. As for notifying members - I contacted every member of WP:Ports with talk page messages about the merger propoal and there have been no replies to date. Most of them are no longer regular editors in this area, so no big deal either way. I would certainly contact them again should the merge go ahead, to let them know the state of play, but I don't imagine there'll be any great flood of commentary or objection.

Overall I agree with Brad that the Transport project suffers from too great a generality of topic, and this limits the number of editors who stop by. But its a step forward from here, and gives our two small but valiant Wikiprojects a platform for subsequent devolution into WP:Ships or somewhere else, as circumstances arise.

In passing, thanks for suggesting this merger idea. Its something I was thinking about for Ports over some years, but enver got around to proposing. And happy new year, wherever you are.Euryalus (talk) 11:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

This page 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.