User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 15

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett/archive_15.

Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 archives.

please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

Jan lokpal bill draft (by Anna Hazare supporters).

Why so serious? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knuwiki (talk • contribs) 17:53, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

60 billion people in India are at present working on the draft of the new bill, that is going to make a strong law to punish corrupt politicians. You can check the google trends http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=lokpal&cmpt=q and twitter trends http://trendsmap.com/local/india for India on the subject. This draft article is strongly needed. Thanks in advance.

Hi, now AfD'd (all three). --KFP (contact | edits) 21:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Graeme, I may go to

]

The best way to do this is to ask on the

WP:AIV page as I was offline when you asked. However our practice here is to warn first as many vandals do pay attention and stop their behaviour. So I have given a warning. The actual person behind an IP number can change so they normally would not get a long block anyway. I have redacted the offensive material from the history, but I am surprised you quoted it if it is so bad. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, Graeme for your reply and yes you're right i shouldn't be quoted this here, but i copied and pasted here so that in the case if you need translation than i may put here and this is in my habit that i usually first warn vandals with different level of warning messages, but here this is not a case that this ip wasn't introduced to the policies of Wikipedia (i had already welcomed this ip) and the act was really offensive, which i thought need direct intervention of admin (and you're some of admins whom i usually contact), but i get you and will response in future wisely. Sorry for this. Bill william compton^Talk 22:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you already have experience with the person behind this IP? If they have caused trouble on different IPs or accounts before and you can demonstrate that (

WP:SOCK), then they can be blocked without further warning, or perhaps a whole range of IP numbers blocked. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello and a question

Hi, just a question for clarification. You nixed my application for filemover rights. I've been quite active over on Commons, where I've made over 3400 contributions, and am now a rollbacker and patroller. I'm admittedly not an expert in media files, but have come to enjoy working with them more than I expected. Is there something I can do to gain the filemover rights over on wikipedia? I find myself spending a lot more time with images than I ever imagined, especially as my work experience has been in print media. Thanks for your guidance. MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I've done very little file work on wikipedia, choosing instead to concentrate on Commons, where I found the licensing issues more challenging, and thus more rewarding. It was a steep learning curve in the beginning, but thanks to helpful tips from Commons administrator Martin, I've caught on and have uploaded some 2372 images, with very few deleted, as I try to be careful with licensing. I don't have filemover rights on Commons, and hadn't thought to apply for them. Until recently, I've concentrated on simply getting the images onto the project. I'm not one for applying for things, but I figured by applying for filemover (and watching how others utilize it), I might be able to add something. Thanks. MarmadukePercy (talk) 06:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for the guidance. MarmadukePercy (talk) 10:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme

You closed the Feb 10 CfD on Former pupils by school in the United Kingdom as "no consensus". However, you offered no explanation of that closure.

Please can you explain why you reached that conclusion, and how you factored the votestacking into your assessment?

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I close this as no consensus to change in bulk. There was little support for any bulk rename at all, and those that wanted renames could not agree on what to rename them too, or the extent of renaming required. The close does not preclude a more limited proposal, eg rename cats that dont start with the word "old". I don't dimiss votes that may appear to be a stack if they give a valid reason for the opinion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So votestacking works so long as the votestackers take care not just say "me too", even if the reason isn't founded in policy or guidelines? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The policy for naming is fairly simple, matching what is is common use at the highest level, so people's justification of what is actually in use is what counts. Here there was no agreement, not even an agreement to leave things as they are. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you just deleted my page about the band "The lost cavalry", I was wondering if you could give me clarification. I guess it’s the No indication of importance clause, but can you give me an idea of what I should have included? Whimi07 (talk) 09:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page was created because I had come upon him in news reports in two separate articles I was editing. The spelling of his name varies, but he is clearly a significant figure in the political movement supporting the Shia in Bahrain, an article seems appropriate to me. Even though It did not have many references, yet. That does not mean that the topic is not WP:N. I believe that it/he is. Here's a proposal: you put it back up, with the {{

]

Thank you.I.Casaubon (talk) 01:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"even a little used nick name is worth having as a redirect". So you're saying that if I wanted, I could redirect Donnymid sucked because he would scream "OH! OH! OH! OH! OH! OH! WHAT WAS IT, AUDIENCE?!?!?!?!?! after every failed Winner's Circle to it because that's my honest opinion on the Osmond version? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi that is not the argument I would recommend you use. That one gets a SD! 21:24, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Re the G6 decline, the pages on which the template is used are test pages, the pages themselves used the old design, some of the templates used on one of the pages don't exist anymore as Netalarm and I G6'd them, it appears we missed this template. Please delete the page as it is no longer used for anything other than testing purposes. Apologies for not giving a reason, though. —

]

I just deleted this as a G3 hoax, and only afterwards saw that you had declined a G3 speedy. I wasn't intending to wheel-war, and I will restore it if you like, but it seemed to me that, although there is indeed a Commander Bunny web-site, content like "Tire Pressure Radio (if you listen your tires will deflate)... WMR – We Monkey Radio (keep songs short so ape-human monkeys not lose interest) ...My New Underpants Radio (aaaahhhh nothing feels better!!!)" put it into G3 territory. It was marked as copyvio, but I didn't find enough correspondence with the source. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not upset to see it go though. There were actually several independent sources (perhaps not reliable) that talked about it. This is the sort of silly stuff that has been on the pirate radio in the USA. It may well have been written by the same person who wrote the other wiki page, especially with its reference to Wikipedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you speedy deleted PolarLake as a copyright violation. No quarrels there, you had your choice of speedy deletion criteria. I did see that the article had an active AfD discussion. I closed that, and may have just scooped you. It is helpful to close them about the same time. I went ahead and salted the page as well, since it had been speedily deleted at least twice before on the many grounds the text qualified under. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:30, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the close. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting the picture back up. I tried to last night, but somehow I got it too large. Wonderful cover. Thanks again!Jdcrackers (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme. I put another comment at

]

You've got mail

I sent a reply. —

Talk • Contribs) • 9:09am • 23:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Can you tell me what the link says that proves this site is notable? Corvus cornix_talk 04:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ymmv. I'll give it a couple of days to see if referencing improves. Corvus cornix_talk 04:34, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, the RfC for merging

]

oi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.29.216.149 (talk) 11:48, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are going to have to say more than that! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:56, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme. I see you have carried out the move at Dark Ages. I'm glad you have stepped in here, because this has dragged on for so long that we need an admin to do take control. However, I was a bit surprised that it happened so suddenly, as I didn't think we had reached consensus on all points: a move was probably inevitable, but we still didn't have agreement how to deal with the controversy. The reason there was so much opposition to the move was that many of us felt it is very important that anyone typing in "Dark Ages" in the hope of finding out about the Early Middle Ages not only finds their way to EMA, but also gets a warning along the way that historians don't like the term DA as a description of EMA. The fear was that if the main DA article is just a disambig, it will be a constant battle to keep this warning in place. What in fact has happened is that you have made the move but not put this warning in place at all, which confirms all fears. Reaching agreement on an acceptable form of words was an absolute precondition for reaching consensus on the move. Can I ask you, since you control here, to see it through and lead us to a solution here. --Doric Loon (talk) 08:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme. Just wanted to say thanks for helping with the backlog at

]

Gay Nigger Association of America

Did you break the history of that article after I specifically pointed out that it would happen on the MfD? Because I'd find that hard to believe, but that's what I'm seeing. Prodego ^talk 00:40, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be very difficult to break it back apart. There is significant overlap in time between the histories of the pages, see for example, [1], [2], [3]. It isn't worth the effort to clean it up, but you really need to check that first before you start pushing the histories together. Prodego ^talk 04:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the page. The page may end up being split in to multiple pages, or multiple versions of a page, or part might be kept deleted, if one set of the overlapping edits is inconsequential. But if the pages don't have the same history, and the histories overlap, then the solution is to not merge them. Prodego ^talk 04:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI - when you decline a G12 due to OTRS pending, please remember to blank it using {{

]

Thanks for your response. If you have a moment, please have a look at my follow-up question. Drmies (talk) 02:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a general question regarding page moves, one that seems rather relevant recently. Are article names determined in accordance with the requirements set out by

, or are they to be subject to Wikipedia user consensus? To my understanding consensus is to be based on policy, i.e. sources, but what happens when users simply refuse to abide by policy and scholarly usage (e.g. for political reasons) and simply "disagree"?

The case at

is concerned. The original naming of the article was a mistake: its current name has virtually no usage in scholarly publications. We are talking about demonstrably negligible results, riddled by a vast majority of sentence fragments. Noticing this, and being aware of naming policy, I conducted thorough research to find an actual name in English-language scholarly use, and it turned out to be "National Liberation War", overwhelmingly (as can easily be verified by the Google tests).

This title however is unacceptable to Balkans nationalists for the sole reason that it was used also by socialist Yugoslavia. Balkans politics, in other words, disagrees with scholarly usage, creating a hostile atmosphere and hence - "no consensus". A number of users have seen fit to post their own ideas and claims about the scope of various historical terms, without supporting them in any way with actual sources. The bottom line is that we currently have an article title, on a relatively large history article, that is completely imaginary and unused. Alongside a far more common name in widespread usage. What I am essentially asking is: is this in accordance with policy that explicitly states "the commonality of the name overrides our desire to avoid passing judgment"?

(P.S. The extent of the nationalist fanaticism and politically motivated censorship I've encountered on this issue leads me to believe I may well be

]

Hi Direktor

You are correct in that the policy says use the common name. In closing the debate all I have to go in is what people said on the talk page. In the case you mention there was no support at all for the page move. If there is no support and only opposition I would close it as a no consensus to move, which is not the same as a consensus not to move, which is where most decide the current name is best. If there was some support then the strengths of arguments according to the policy would have to be evaluated. And some people argued that different names were the most common. In this situation you can create redirects from the names that you think are valid.

When names are translated into English there is a chance for a dispute on Wikipedia, and also where there is a dispute in real life there is a very high chance of a disagreement on Wikipedia, and you have both here. An added issue is that neutral people are not participating in the move discussions, so we are left with those that have strong opinions. Perhaps I should encourage participation by other neutral but keen people. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(hope you don't mind me moving this here :)

My mistake here is that I first proposed a move for "People's Liberation War" some time ago. This was a rather stupid and rash move since the proposed name, though still several times more common, has very little use in scholarly publications, particularly recent ones (though still more than the current name, ironically). I did not research the matter properly. It turned out that "National Liberation War" is several times more common even than "People's", and was additionally in widespread use in publications. When I proposed the second move, however, it appeared that most neutral people were sick of this matter, so we only had strong detractors responding.

I believe, however, that the Google tests (and lack of any sources in support of the claims of the opposing users), speak for themselves. One can claim just about anything ("the proposed name does not cover some aspects of the war!"), but without any specifics (which "aspects"?) or sources to support it - it is just a claim anyone could make in any move discussion he/she opposes (in this case likely for political reasons).

If I do feel strongly about this move, it is because it is essentially a case where rabid Balkans nationalism successfully and continuously trumps cold hard research and Wiki policy. After a while it gets to you.

In conclusion, basically if you would bring this issue to the attentions of neutral users I would appreciate it. Both sides there discuss like morons essentially (myself included :), but when the bare arguments are reviewed there is imho really little question here. Other, alternative names I have researched as well, and found that they have as little or slightly more support than the current title, miles behind the proposed one. --

TALK) 11:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks

Order of the Mop , for their commitment and dedication and is entitled to display this award for being a fantastic admin, Kind regards, thanks and happy editing, — Talk • Contribs) • 09:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply ]

For a userbox version go

here

.
You are member number: 40

Thanks for the help you've given me in the last month, I appreciate it. —

]

Hello Graeme, I have PRODded this article which I think you opened, though possibly from someone else's contribution? The history is a little unclear. I may have messed up the PROD which resulted in your not being notified - hence this manual notice! I realise you may not have any proprietorial interest, so if you don't feel strongly either way please ignore! Best wishes, Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 19:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just wanted to point out that this person did not appear on any of the shows he listed. Also did a Google search regarding this guy and the search results are his Facebook account, his blog among other personal accounts on other social networking sites. Kindly reconsider the speedy deletion. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 12:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, it is actually also a copy of a web site that says to not copy, as well as being on the users page too. I have also salted it for a few years. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there.Thank you for replying on my talk page.I am now using the page mover and I think I'm doing my best to get the file mover.Thank you for telling.--Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 02:25, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've got mentally lost with this one. Talk:Mahmoud ghadel is a redirect from User talk:Mahmoud thalji, while Mahmoud ghadel was a redirect to Mahmoud tjjh which I've deleted (along with other bits of this mess). I'm trying to preserve the talk page stuff at Mahmoud ghadel that should be on User talk:Mahmoud thalji. There is already contents on the User talk:Mahmoud thalji page. Peridon (talk) 12:23, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'd got so boggled I forgot you can c&p talk stuff! I think it's all cleared up now. (Someone will find bits, probably.) Peridon (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there.Thank you for giving me the file mover.--Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 14:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK, thanks for just backing out to old history of this article (to remove the copyvio) rather than just deleting it. I should have done that myself rather than nominating it for deletion, I guess. So thanks for handling this correctly. Herostratus (talk) 18:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you declined a speedy because the user claimed it was their own work. Would you please look at another article created by the same user? Note that the first sentence of this article was exactly copied from one page of a website and every other individual sentence was exactly copied from another page of that website. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have dissolved the article in acid now based on the earlier response to the speedy delete notice. I don't see a roblem with the current version of Barnet Market though. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:45, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into it and taking care of the situation! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Below is my response to OwenBlacker at Talk:Kingdom of Sardinia. After long discussions in which several registered users opposed User:Jonny Bee Goo, he continues to foist his version of history on us. Some other editors have entered the fray and helped him by reverting me. They have not, until I demanded it in an edit summary, engaged in the discussion on the talk page despite the fact that there is an open RFC. I do not have time to waste persuing an imposed resolution with this user (Jonny), who appears to use multiple IPs when not logged in. So I just revert him, knowing that I had support for that (see talk page, section "Continued discussion on naming").

It is my contention that the sources given by Jonny are not

Talk:Kingdom of Sicily, Jerusalem and Cyprus

for instance, where I quote some of Storrs (in the references section of this article, but not footnoted). I could cite many sources (say, T. N. Bisson, The Medieval Crown of Aragon) that talk about the medieval K. of Sardinia, which is basically ignored by the encyclopedias Jonny likes to cite. They're simply not reliable for this kind of stuff. In effect, the "sourced" version is not sourced, because its sources are not reliable (and none are secondary sources). On top of that, its English is crap. (And to call a secondary source, by a distinguished specialist of Sardinian history, "spurious" is absurd. Did you read it?)

I don't mind if the page is protected, as long as the other version is protected. I should have requested protection some time ago, but since I've never wasted time on that before I didn't think to do it. If you do not unprotect, I will just request the page be moved to

]

Please use the talk page Talk:Kingdom of Sardinia to work out what editors agree on to appear on the page, so that every one interested can participate. If there are divergent points of view then they can both be stated by saying what the difference of opinion is on that matter and which reliable source says what. When there is some agreement use the {{edit protected}} to ask for the change to be introduced. You can ask me here too, but may take longer. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What a joke. . . Srnec (talk) 04:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme, Thanks for taking the time to help. I take note of all your comments. The artist will be releasing most, if not all, of his work under the GNU license, and I will organize the photo uploads (one of him and one of an example of his work) in due course. Concerning the name, however, although I note that the person commonly known as "Picasso" comes logically under "Pablo Picasso", both Madonnna and Lady Gaga come under their stage names. Antonino has made it clear to me that he wishes to be known and referred to professionally as Antonino. Is this possible? Best regards, VelhinhoEstoniano (talk) 22:37, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments! VelhinhoEstoniano (talk) 23:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, could you perform a hist-merge for

]

John Francis Yaxley CSD decline

Hi, please could you point me to a policy/guideline that says award of an CBE, of which many are doled out to career civil servants each year "just for being there", constitutes meeting

article. Should I add my aunt to Wikipedia? And my uncle? Both of them received OBEs and one also got the Queen's Jubilee Medal but were never noted in any publication other than for receiving those awards and en passant as a part of their usual work duties. Does the same apply to MBEs, of which even more are issued, including to school crossing patrol officers, workers in school canteens, minor political party volunteers etc?

I'm not having a go at you for the decline, which I am sure is justified in whatever guideline it is that I have failed to see! - Sitush (talk) 07:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got your reply. Thanks very much for that. I'm clearly still struggling with the difference between CSD's "importance" and the more general provisions for "notability". One day it will sink into my thick skull, I promise you. I've just edited the article for trivia, minor BLP issues and employed the Gazette citation template (quite a neat one, that). I'll do some digging around newspapers etc in the hope of finding something to ascertain notability. The bit about organising the first census seems to be probably the most likely candidate. - Sitush (talk) 08:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme B! Could you possibly have a little look at

]

Why was it deleted??

Hey Graeme,

i'm just wondering why my article 'Snicks' was deleted?? I'm sure there was no incriminating or offensive material in it and considering it is an actual term used in modern youth culture, it certainly is not vandalism. If you were to search Snicks in modern cultural music which may not be 'Top 40' track listed but still popular in certain demographics, you will undoubtedly notice the recurrence of the terminology. With words such as 'Nigger' and 'Gook' being present without any concerns and yet their obvious derogatory but coincidentally slang use both being mentioned, i fail to see where a word with not discriminatory history or future reference can be singled out as 'vandalism'. I at least with an open mind, request a restoration with guidelines for the page's material before removing it for good.

Thanks very much

File:Tlichoflag.svg

I don't believe that the file should have been deleted under the F10. That says "that are neither image, sound, nor video files, are not used in any article". However that was an image file and it was used in two articles. The claim of fair use could have been better and probably didn't meet the current criteria. Anyway, I uploaded File:I-TliCho-flag-new.gif which is smaller in size and re-did the rationale but only for the one article. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 13:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I looked again and you did delete it as F2, the first time I only looked at what it was tagged with. Strange it wasn't working because it had been earlier but I can't remember the last time I looked at the pages it was in. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I concede you were right to decline the speedy deletion on the criteria presented (I didn't tag it BTW, I came upon this at articles for deletion). However, I wonder if it might fit a G1? The four sentence or so blurb does not even talk about presidential blame, it talks about four distinct items that are not related to each other or the supposed topic. Thus I think a G1 speedy delete could be applied. The "article" has no chance of surviving a deletion process. CycloneGU (talk) 22:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the merge, I noticed someone came behind me and added the rest of your PM's comments. I was trying to keep it short and sweet. --Smart30 (talk) 07:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But why do you suppose those other folks are so zealous to delete someone who is all over the news? It's no longer a flash in the pan, any more than the 15 minutes of Guy Fawkes, Lee Harvey Oswald, or Neil Armstrong. Rammer (talk) 04:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

meta:Deletionism Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme, I note that you have recently deleted the 'keys2drive' page, which essentially provided factual details on a $17m novice driver program that the Australian Government is funding and the Australian Automobile Association is charged with delivering, and I don't believe the good-faith author of the page was notified that the page was selected for deletion. Can you please advise what edits are required in order to have this page restored. With thanks, in advance, --SH1212 (talk) 05:29, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme,

There is a catimprove, and 2 other tags on the SmartSound article. Can I remove any or all of these?

Also, can I add an external link to the SmartSound.com website?

Thanks for your help, Craigtheskier (talk) 18:24, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A courtesy note, given that you closed the requested move discussion in April (

]

• Thanks, closed the move discussion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try and change the article of the tone. Can I do this in my chrispepper userspace - and do you restore it to that area? Novice wiki writer here.

12:35, 7 April 2011 Graeme Bartlett (talk | contribs) deleted "Keys2drive" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrispepper (talk • contribs)

Could you please reset PC protection on the article above. It has bot semi protection and PC protection, do you think that's right. mauchoeagle _(c) 20:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well in response I have upgraded the protection on the redirect, because that was getting vandalised by anons. And taken pending changes off the main article. You should use

WP:RFPP. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

PD-Maldives

• {{PD-Maldives}}

Can you provide some sort of source for this? You linked s:International Copyright Relations of the United States, which does mention IP prior to 2010. I've also nominated an image for deletion: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maumoon-Abdul-Gayoom.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:18, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme, could you please tell me a better and easiest way to nominate several articles for "Speedy Deletion" by a single stroke only. I've found a user, who makes useless and unnecessary articles, at least as according to his latest contributions. He has made around 500 articles in a single day on Wikipedia, all about non-notable Indian villages with a single line only and I think all of these should be deleted because if this is allowed then in this way we'd need a separate Wikipedia for Indian villages only as there are more than one million villages in India. If somehow you've any admin privilege to delete these article then please do it by yourself. — Bill william compton^Talk 13:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme. I think we have a possible problem here. User talk:Moray An Par joined WP a month ago and I'm sum sure he's acting in good faith. However, I'm sure you and I agree that a deletion spree (of any kind) is not what we want - especially where schools, at least for the time being, enjoy a special dispensation. I've left a message on his tp - perhaps you could check it out and see if I have said the right thing. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, I'm new to contributing on Wikipedia and I would appreciate your help with an article I'm writing. It is a draft on my user page and it was tagged as 'written like an advertisement'. You provided your support in allowing more time to make adjustments. I made changes and I think it complies with the guidelines. Would you please offer suggestions on what other edits need to be made and how to remove the tag? (The draft is under Wikalias/Bilingual Books, Inc.) Thank youWikalias (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Could you please close the request move at Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries#Move? so that I can post another one at request moves. I think it is pretty obvious that after 6 weeks and 6:5 votes, the current request has gone nowhere. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here for the Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries#Result of the vote and discussion. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please unlock List of Pakistani inventions and discoveries. There haven't been objections to its existence since late March. Now with another failed attempt at solving the dispute around the Indian list, the Pakistani article cannot reasonably be held hostage any longer of the impasse there. From the template at the bottom alone it is obvious that Pakistan has every bit as much a right to a list of its own as any other sovereign modern nation, this is absolutely clear. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pakistani inventions and discoveries is now unprotected. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, are you anywhere near the National Museum of Australia in Canberra? I am looking for someone willing to get a photograph of this for an article. I posted the same request to Tim Starling's page, but he is a busy man and I don't think he checks his talk page very often. Please let me know if you are willing to do this so I can cancel the request to Tim. SpinningSpark 17:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Graeme can't, I'll be willing to travel to Canberra and try to photographing it. Bidgee (talk) 21:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I won't have time to stop there before Thursday though. It should be in Australian journeys exhibition. If it is a special exhibition they don't allow photography though. The new AU government recommendation is for information to be cc-by on government web sites, but NMA has not done this yet. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know when I went to the NMA that they were working on some new exhibitions (not within the special exhibition area), reading the site it does seem to be one of the new exhibitions setup. Bidgee (talk) 09:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went there today. The exhibition is several years old upstairs. The challenge was the very poor lighting and glass cabinet. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! Now in List of chronometers on HMS Beagle. SpinningSpark 17:30, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a picture of Gordon Chown, with the proper permissions, but it still not showing on his page. Can you tell me how to do that?

Ncarsca (talk) 13:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)ncarsca[reply]

Hello Graeme Bartlett. In regards to the copyright issue of a picture b_jonas uploaded [4], he posted the author's permission to use under non-commercial circumstances. If you want to confirm this, see this link http://www.math.cornell.edu/~hatcher/AT/ATchapters.html. Click on on the download button after "Table of Contents, Preface". The permission to use is stated on the title page. The original picture is on page 6 of the pdf file after Chapter 2: Homology. Money is tight (talk) 18:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting through the backlog that was piling up at

]

The next time you review another request for me to get AWB access, read this page, although I think you should read it now. Thanks! Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 00:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to the message you left me on that page: I'm too lazy to type manually!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 04:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, nice to virtually meet you. To respond to your question Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions I wish to use the what links here tool and the database scanner. I now have over 400 main space edits (with over 100 deleted edits). If you would like further details I would be happy to provide them, thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 20:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

]

Thank you!

Just to say thank you for the AutoWikiBrowser flag privilege much appreciated! User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 02:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you do photo requests? If so would you mind photographing the following?

• Australian Transport Safety Bureau headquarters - 62 Northbourne Avenue Canberra ACT 2601

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It would not be a super exciting building, but I can photograph it next time I am in the vicinity. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks in advance! Please let me know when you get the photo :) WhisperToMe (talk) 08:22, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the second thought, are the articles worth merging to their locality articles? Shouldn't their education sections just briefly summarize statistics etc and not elaborate on a single school that is not really notable. Moray An Par (talk) 05:53, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, thanks for your suggestions and for removing the ad tag from the draft (Wikalias/Bilingual Books, Inc.). I'll replace the word "springboard" as you mentioned. Once I make that change and include the images, I'd like to upload the draft to the encyclopedia at this stage in its development. And of course, continue to add information about the company as it becomes available. If there's anything else I need to do, I would appreciate your feedback as this is my first experience with Wikipedia. And again, thank you very much for your help. Wikalias (talk) 00:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the

talk) 04:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

A question..

How is File:SharpSH251iS.jpg different from s2 three views.png ? Both meet the fair use licensing criteria.

I just want to understannd wikipedia rules better. Thanks. Virtualerian (talk) 12:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MfD discussion

Would you like to close

talk) 12:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

closed now, I cannot actually remember all those templates to use, so I have to look them up! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation to the 10th anniversary of WP

I could not be there but I appreciated being asked How did you discover I existed and lived in CBR? Greenmaven (talk) 03:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme Bartlett, Jack Greenmaven 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. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Fixing Ellen here activities

Hello Greame Bartlett, I saw you fixed several editions done by

LIVECHAT Software. Could you please help me clean that up? Klim3k 09:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klim3k (talk • contribs

)

Graeme, you might be interested in a comment I just placed on

User talk:PMDrive1061 regarding this user. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

I have no doubt that Ellen Here and Elaine here are the same person. User:Sabrina Gage who created the earlier version of Comm100 could well be different but was the marketer at the time. The new recreation is much more sophisticated, with an intro, infobox, history, and products, including stub tags and a dud interwikilink. But only referenced the company web site. Elaine's other deleted contribution was the talk page contesting, which was based on other stuff exists. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened an SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ellen here and am notifying you as an involved admin. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme, viewpoint please

It concerns the sentence in the Queen article. Now i had.. "Bohemian Rhapsody" was voted the top single of all time (by the UK), [5] ...whereas user Moriori has it... "Bohemian Rhapsody" was voted the top British single of all time (which i also had previously myself before i changed it). So is it top single, or top British single?. Which in your view is it? Is for example Madonna's "Like a Virgin" a British single?.. Elvis, Nirvana, Michael Jackson British singles?? The citation states the "UK's favourite hit"... not the favourite UK hit. A third opinion would be great Graeme as i'm in two minds myself.Queen Zeppelin Metallica Floyd (talk) 04:04, 04 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would go for the one that reflects the source most closely without ambiguity. British single is a bit too vague as you suggest so "by UK listeners" or "in the UK" qualification could be good. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Graeme, i've used "UK poll", so "In 2002, Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody" was voted the top single of all time in a UK poll conducted by the Guinness World Records British Hit Singles Book"..Queen Zeppelin Metallica Floyd (talk) 10:32, 04 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds clear. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just on the Queen article itself Graeme, it became unprotected 2 days ago (partly the reason i registered in truth) and the editing has multiplied. The article traffic is high and the page may again need to be semi-protected to stablise the editing if it continues. Cheers.Queen Zeppelin Metallica Floyd (talk) 17:01, 04 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice

Perhaps you are not aware of the upshot of your advice to User:QZMF in the section above. As you can see, he wanted "top single of all time" and I wanted "top British single of all time" which are obvious chalk and cheese. After your advice to him re unambiguously reflecting the source, User:QZMF said he had used "was voted the top single of all time in a UK poll." Two things, (1) he ignored your advice by reinserting information that did not reflect the source, and (2), his edit summary claimed "reworded for accuracy per Admin" when no admin had actually previewed what he had inserted. It was only later that you commented "that sounds clear". Did you not actually read the source and see his edit was inaccurate?

Anyway, if you look at the article you can see it is accurate now, thanks to my persistence and edit which quotes the source verbatim. Never thought I'd see the day when we couldn't paraphrase, or the day when someone couldn't equate UK with British.

I have left a message for User:QZMF saying (edited) "One of the good things about Wiki is that edit histories are available to be checked later. It would be a good idea in future for you to not ignore advice you sought from an admin by inserting inaccurate information into an article. It might also be a good idea to not say in an edit summary you "reworded for accuracy per Admin" when no admin previewed what you inserted."Moriori (talk) 01:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My role as an admin is irrelevant, I am just another opinion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't criticise your role as an admin. I questioned your opinion. User:QZMF quoted your opinion claiming admin endorsement. Big difference. Moriori (talk) 02:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Mabdul's talk page.
Message added mabdul 19:22, 7 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Mabdul's talk page.
Message added mabdul 22:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mick sans Glasses

[I've made certain details less public here; they're obviously visible in the previous diff) Goodbye, little user. DS (talk) 11:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plastics Recycling and need for Bio-polymers in India

I am the Ghost writer for the above mentioned article, and am most grateful for your time. I have just been acquainting myself with the language Wikipedia uses, and hence found it difficult to add in the references. Thank you, I have done so now. Patel almitra (talk) 03:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Devayani, under the guise of Almitra Patel[reply]

Talk:Gaza War#RFC

Hi Graeme. Thank you for closing Talk:Gaza War#RFC. :) Cunard (talk) 06:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, Thank you for closing Talk:Gaza War#RFC. :) Could you clarify if inclusion of additional names in the introduction section is allowed in new consensus framework? Just to clarify I'm talking about addition and not replacement of existing names. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 23:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baarnstar

		The Baarnstar
		Thanks, now I feel a little sheepish. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Martel College logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hanszen College logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Duncan College FLAG.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conduit (network and publisher platform)

The exact same user that had previously vandalized the Conduit (network and publisher platform) page did the same thing, creating the Conduit (virus) page, as well, and linking the two. This is unacceptable and I have addressed the vandalism by inserting the previous content. However, the Conduit (virus) page remains. If you read the articles, many of which are from some of the most respected tech websites and news sources online, including TechCrunch and All Things Digital, you will see that Conduit is NOT a virus. You and I have already discussed this, in fact. The Kittins floating in the sky user is simply using message board chatter as his sources (incorrect chatter, at that). This cannot continue. Please delete the Conduit (virus) page, which was already previously deleted, and please look into banning Kittins. Thank you! Beobjectiveplease (talk) 22:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

D-Pryde

Ya hi....I was wondering why the article for D-Pryde was deleted, and I am not able to create that page. There is plenty of info that I can use on him in this page: http://rap.wikia.com/wiki/D-Pryde_%28Rapper%29.

--Techno31 (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pdfpdf

Hi Graeme. :) Just quickly, in regard to [6], any unblock request from Pdfpdf will have to come via email, so we won't, I assume, be aware of it, as he has been locked out of his talk page. I'm not sure if he was intending to make one or not. - Bilby (talk) 15:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect?

Is it appropriate to create a redirect for

Moreton Basin to Clarence Moreton Basin? I am fairly sure it would be so I will create one and if it is not correct to do so can you fix it? - Shiftchange (talk) 05:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Clarence Moreton Basin is the geological basin. Moreton Basin was an old geological term, but I don't know if it has any other modern meaning such as the river valley. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion.
Message added 04:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Martel College logo.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sid Richardson tiny logo.gif

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:54, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Duncan College FLAG.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Lovett College shield.png

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:57, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hanszen College logo.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:07, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:HRWiess Crest.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:10, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jones College garland logo.png

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation

In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (

pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here

, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles

here

can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid concerns that this notice might violate

WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page (or either page's respective talk page) since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion templates

Which template would be correct to add to the article? G-12? I think that's the one I meant to put on, but pasted the wrong one...

Talk to the hand!) 12:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Talk to the hand!) 12:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Harold Radford

Thank you. You may have saved the new article. Eddaido (talk) 14:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk:Theunknownnun photos

I see you deleted on of Theunknownnun's photos. They also uploaded 2 more today that does not have a free license. I'm hesitant to nominate to delete as that will add some messages on their talk page because what you have put on their today maybe lost among the messages. Can you work your voodoo? Bgwhite (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are coming from now magazine, I can find with a google image search with the size specified. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Jerusalem?

Hi, regarding this edit, you wrote in your edit summary that Jerusalem is both in Israel and under Israeli control. Half of that is true, but East Jerusalem is widely recognized as being part of the Palestinian territories. Anyway, to avoid getting into too big of a political argument, I just reworded the sentence to leave each city's location ambiguous (here). I hope that is acceptable to you. Cheers, nableezy - 23:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• That looks OK by me. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of List of Pakistani inventions and discoveries

It appears that the edit warring has resumed since your unprotection of List of Pakistani inventions and discoveries. You unprotected, saying that people are starting to agree. I'm not seeing any evidence of agreement anywhere, really. Am I missing something? – GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far only 1 disagreement in a month, that does not need full protection. When it was locked down there were no updates, so progress totally stalled. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:01, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:In fact request for File Mover

Graeme,

talk • contribs) 10:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, the idea was for the request not to be archived, it will be in the history though. I do not expect this user will cause trouble, and each request can be considered on its merits. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, I don't understand why we wouldn't want to archive it. Seems like it would make the archives somewhat inconsistent.--

talk • contribs) 10:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Hong Kong meetup

Hello! I'm not exactly sure where you are, though if you're in Hong Kong I'd really appreciate it if you can attend the next Hong Kong meetup on Friday 22 July 2011! Deryck C. 17:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File mover

I had uploaded other files correctly before I asked for the right again, just to show that I know the basic rules. Plus, as I said before, I wanted the admins to think about me rather than being affected by some other non-admins. Please read this message for Kingpin13, too. Cheers, In fact ( contact ) 12:43, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at

Spiridion Luzi

Spiridion Luzi, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

A message for you

This giraffe and I are both very grateful for all the work you do with copyright, especially at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Your answers are frequently polite, helpful, and accurate. Thanks, you're the best. – Quadell (talk)

A thank you from the Heathen Harvest collective

Thank you so much for approving the HH page, Graeme. It is much appreciated. We will continue to update and improve it over time. -- Sbgrant (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage.
Message added 09:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rcsprinter (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, excuse me? Why won't you let me have AWB? Message at the checkpage. Rcsprinter (talk) 15:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting for an answer. Rcsprinter (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme - I've just had a short chat with Rcsprinter123 at his talk page. Would I be acceptable as a supervisor? Worm^TT · (talk) 14:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Copy of Deleted Page - Gary R. Englert

Graeme,

Would you be so kind as to provide me with a copy (including images and references) of the deleted page for Gary R. Englert?

If not through Wikipedia channels, it may be e-mailed to me a -redacted-

Thanks!

<Mooney1084v (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)>[reply]

• Email sent. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett/archive_15&oldid=1144420684"