User talk:Cirt/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Kate Kennedy Club

Two Points :

1. Should I have PROD'ed this with hindsight ?

2. Though you marked it as re-listed don't think you added it to the Daily log for 2 March

Codf1977 (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted it. Cirt (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

about cinema techniques

how to do dual roll in the shooting —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.108.42 (talk) 12:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Try the article Cinematic techniques? Cirt (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Endeca

Thank you for your alertness and help with respect to the COI regarding Endeca Technologies Inc. Perhaps now the article can proceed in a neutral fashion. --Cantabwarrior (talk) 14:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Is my edit on the article

Is my edit on the article Anonymous (Group) incorrect?Keep It Clean! Respect Public Property! -Superintendent, Halo 3:ODST 17:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is a bit POV pushing. Cirt (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Opus Dei

I am in contact with a sociologist who will agree that Opus Dei is Catholic. Is this sufficient proof to convince you? Also, please stop accusing me of making this a personal issue. I'm an anthropologist whose specialty is religion. I have no "personal" interest in this issue. I'm not expressing my "feelings." This is plain and simple logic and a serious question regarding your epistemology.--Kismetmagic (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

That would be WP:NOR, unless you provide a source that was previously published somewhere. Cirt (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand that. My point is if he were to refer me to his online, already published research, would you accept that Opus Dei is Catholic? --Kismetmagic (talk) 18:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Let us keep this discussion to the article's talk page, please. Cirt (talk) 19:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I will from now on if you promise to stop insisting that my arguments amount to nothing more than "feelings." Further, address my issues rather than bulldozing over them and insisting on your way. Stop citing the rules and actually discuss the points I bring up. --Kismetmagic (talk) 19:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The points you bring up are your opinions. Per site policy, we should stick to a discussion of what secondary sources say about the subject matter. Cirt (talk) 19:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Pizza Planet

Hi, Cirt. Why did you delete the Pizza Planet redirect? Your deletion rationale referenced an uncompleted AfD of the target article, but that discussion contains no mention of the article's redirects. Powers ^T 20:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to create the redirect, as an editorial decision. Cirt (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Well that would be reversing your editorial decision, wouldn't it? I thought I'd try to understand your reason before simply reverting it. Powers ^T 20:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

No, that's okay. It is alright with me. Cirt (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Peter Craig Pennell

Hi. You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Craig Pennell as delete and deleted the "Peter Craig Pennell" page, but there is also Peter Pennell, where the original page was recently moved to, which needs deleting as well. I realise you only closed it a short while ago, but just in case you missed it...cheers--ClubOranje^T 00:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Relisting

I don't think you're relisting AFDs properly. For some reason it's making each day's AFD log show up in Category:Relisted AfD debates. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Could be an issue with the script. Have you asked Mr.Z-man (talk · contribs)? Cirt (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Matt Tilley

Hi, just noted you closed the discussion that kept Matt Tilley. Since you wrapped it up, it might be appropriate if you remove the AfD tag on the page. Regards Paul ( Paul Roberton (talk)) 01:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

oops

I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afco-Skynet as delete. I mistakenly thought it had already been relisted, then I noticed the timestamp indicating you just relisted it today. Feel free to revert my close if you like. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No, that is a good close. :) No worries, Cirt (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello. You have a new message at Swarm's talk page.

• And another. Swarm^(Talk)

Thanks, Cirt (talk) 15:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of TripleA

I have a hard time understanding the decision to delete the TripleA (computer game) Wikipedia entry. Both as a decision by itself - games are part of popular culture - as well as in the context of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_video_games list. Putting it even more simple: If "TripleA" is googled, the projects page lists as first hit.

Maybe the reason for deletion can be specified a little more. Is there any doubt that the game exists? Or that it is part of popular culture by means of an active community? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ErnieBommel (talk • contribs) 15:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The statistics for the entry also indicate it was being accessed frequently. How do I know that? I have the statistics of how many people have been redirected from the Wikipedia entry to the pages link within it. That the game exists is easily verified using these links too. The time between deletion request and deletion was rather short too. If an open source game which has a constant fan community for more than 6 years now is not worth being listed, there is a need to explain why commercial games far younger than that are. A boardgame which is very similar to TripleA is listed at Wikipedia without a single "peer-reviewed" article cited either. Newspapers are not peer-reviewed.

If I put all this together, the decision seems somewhat fishy to me. I am not speculating about any influence having been used yet, but its hard not to.

It has been argued that due to the fact that the game is not listed at Moby games, its entry should be removed. I conclude that being listed there justifies an entry then, and will thus add the game there.

I took a copy of the deletion discussion and will make it available to the the TripleA community, in order to see if I am the only one having a bad feeling about it or not.

Ernie Bommel —Preceding unsigned comment added by ErnieBommel (talk • contribs) 15:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Consensus was for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TripleA (computer game). Cirt (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

A 2 vs 3 vote is called a consensus here, and justifies deletion within a weeks time? Interesting. Guess I am going to file a deletion request for the Axis and Allies article, just to see how that one is defended - since it does not stand up to any of the critics pointed at the TripleA entry. Also would have expected a little more respect within among people involved in open source projects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.99.175.22 (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I too am surprised that the Triple-A article was deleted. I think the deletions have NOT been in the spirit of wiki's policies. I do not think that the deletion and notability policies are there to justify deletions such as these. The Triple-A game engine IS notable by the simple fact that it has attracted a large and active community. The game engine itself includes many popular games, and the community has produced quite a large variety of mods. There are active lobbies where anytime of day there is no shortage of people looking to play 2-6 player live games. There is a ladder, there have been tournaments, there are alot of people interested in this open sourced game engine. Wiki's Notability Policy is somewhat subjective though. So I might understand the reasoning behind having a community consensus determine an articles worth to the international internet community (wiki isn't just for dedicated Wikipedians... anybody using a search engine constitutes the community served by wiki). The way the deletions were done here is a farce! It is a joke to say that a handful of people constitute a community consensus. I saw one article deleted with just 2 people involved in the deletion discussion. The discussion itself is over in a week and the decision is made willy nilly by those few who happen to know the article is up for deletion. Anyone can put an article up for deletion. I absolutely feel that these recent deletions are NOT in keeping with the spirit of wiki's policies. The worth of wiki is diminished by these hasty and unfounded deletions! AWhiteElk (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Another consideration as to the error of deleting Triple-A's article... The user who put the Triple-A article up for deletion clearly didn't understand what Triple-A is. That user states one justification for the deletion is that there already is a paragraph describing Triple-A in the Axis and Allies article. But Triple-A is NOT an Axis and Allies clone. Triple-A is an open source GAME ENGINE. Triple-A comes with a variety of playable games, but there are NO games released with it that are clone to Axis and Allies. The games that resemble Axis and Allies are created by the community and are just a few of many games that can be downloaded separately. A single paragraph tagged onto an Axis and Allies article is no justification towards deleting the Triple-A article based on duplicity. AWhiteElk (talk) 21:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a draft page, within your userspace. Cirt (talk) 22:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Would this draft page be for the purpose of creating a 'corrected' version of the deleted article? Would you please restore that article to my userspace so I might better understand the reason for deletion? I'm having a hard time understanding the notability issue here. On further WP research it is still unclear to me. I suppose I'm an Inclusionist ;~p AWhiteElk (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Another question... Doesn't the fact that the Triple-A game engine comes up 4th in a Google search speak towards notability? Triple-A has clearly sparked some notable interest to be rated so highly. Triple-A Googled AWhiteElk (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

why the hell have you deleted the entry for the open source project "triplea"?

the game not simply a clone of axis and allies it is a framework for games with similar mechanics but it has a community and i would say its safe bet that more game of triplea are played every day then games of axis and allies. if you do not undo your action you are NOT contributing to wikipedia you are subverting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ubernaut (talk • contribs) 04:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: Moved this comment to same subsection on a theme. Cirt (talk) 07:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, in response to userfication request - please see User:AWhiteElk/TripleA (computer game). Cirt (talk) 07:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Cirt. I see the reference section is light. Rather than a deletion action, perhaps a verifiability option would have been best? Water under the bridge but food for future admin thought? As to verifiability, would you think SourceForge would qualify notabilty? AWhiteElk (talk) 19:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring triplea although i still cant find it other by going directly to white elks page. i do have another random question i couldn't figure out how to get answered i guess i will try to put that on my talk page with that help me link you provided, but i thought i'd mention it here in case i dont do it correctly. thansk again.ubernaut (talk) 19:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

That article is only there so we can work on it. Once we address the notability issue to the deleting admins satisfaction, we can request for it to be restored to the public view. AWhiteElk (talk) 21:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It appears the whole "Computer versions" paragraph within the Axis and Allies boardgame article has been deleted by you, Cirt. Since such a paragraph is standard for all comparable major boardgames (like Risk, Diplomacy, Monopoly), I am starting to wonder about your motivation. Can you explain how these actions are meant to be in the spirit and interest of the Wikipedia community? It is hard to interpret this as something else as some personal crusade against TripleA. But that would mean abuse of your status. TripleA is not Axis and Allies, but it definitely is of interest to people enjoying Axis and Allies. It also appears the TripleA Supply Depot has been locked as a link. Based on what? I am probably not diplomatic, but neither are your actions. And anyways, this is not about me after all. I should add that the deletion was partly justified by the fact that TripleA was already mentioned within the Computer Versions paragraph of the Axis and Allies boardgame article. The same paragraph that got deleted now. --ErnieBommel (talk) 22:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I did not remove any particular paragraph. You are mistaken. Please see the user draft version, that is linked to, above. Cirt (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe he was speaking of your Feb 15th edit (rm unsourced) to the Axis and Allies article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Axis_&_Allies&diff=prev&oldid=344268888 AWhiteElk (talk) 03:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes. That was wholly unsourced material. Should not be restored, unless properly sourced, per WP:BURDEN. Cirt (talk) 04:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep I understand the need for ref's there. But question the deletion approach. From WP:BURDEN "Editors might object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. It has always been good practice to make reasonable efforts to find sources oneself that support such material, and cite them." That first paragraph you deleted contains a game that it is listed in the articles "See Also" section. Following that link I see that it has it's own fully referenced wiki article. Other options... , { {unreferencedsection} }, { {refimprove} }, { {unreferenced} }. I believe that hasty deletions harm WP's credibility and usefulness. I can expound on this as requested. Why take destructive routes which serve to alienate would-be editors and readers when there are perfectly appropriate constructive options available? 67.183.211.117 AWhiteElk (talk) 20:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to copy the removed (unsourced) text to the talk page, and work on it there if you like. :) Cirt (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

LoL thanks buddy. I pondered ref editing it, but I still struggle at whats credible, reliable, accepted. Got my hands full trying to learn how to get TripleA re-listed. No comments on the rest... again? AWhiteElk (talk) 23:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Formatting the references with WP:CIT instead of just barely linking things, will help to evaluate better. Cirt (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

PQ Draft

sorry about that, forgot to tell you where to look. User:Bmxoffspring99/PQ_Systems,_Inc

Bmxoffspring99 (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of 193.195.187.186

You maybe interested to know that following the activites of two students on the evening of March 2nd the Network Services Manager has taken the decision to block student access to Wikipedia. I am nopt sure how long this block will stay in place but if it is taken down I think we would like to see a block on editing pages. Thanks and apologies 193.195.187.186 (talk) 12:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC) T. Bullock Badminton School Network Services (personal wiki account Tb2571989)

Alright thanks for this notice. Cirt (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Lopez Negrete Communications

Hi Cirt,

Can I ask that you userfy this article. I think it has potential for notability with the right amount of research and editing. If after editing I think the article is worthy for the mainspace, I will only proceed with your permission. Thanks, --PinkBull 15:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Pink Bull/Lopez Negrete Communications. Cirt (talk) 15:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!--PinkBull 15:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 15:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:24.197.27.85

Don't know if you watchlisted his talk page, but from his unblock request he pretty much confirmed he is the same guy all over again, just with a new IP range. Went right back to the single article on that prosecutor he hates, which never mentions Shamrock, Texas at all nor "confirms" any of his wild stories, and his usual claims of censorship that he isn't allowed to degenerate the city over his personal beef. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Probably best to go to WP:SPI from here. Cirt (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Alas the old ones are too stale for Checkuser, however he has also now made a legal threat[1].-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanx

Thank you :-) --95.247.6.165 (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

209.206.145.8

About this IP you just blocked, could I ask you what is the differences between a schoolblock and what you just did? If you don't mind enlightening me, I would like to know, thank you. Sincerely. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 21:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I just did the standard block for vandalism. Cirt (talk) 21:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Yeah, I saw that... but as I had noticed a few other constructive edits in the contribution history, what if a {{schoolblock}} template was placed instead? Thoughts? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 21:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

At this point will just wait for the block to expire. Cirt (talk) 21:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Okay then, toodles~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 21:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK preps

Do you mind if I fiddle a bit with your preps? I don't see yet the final result, but was thinking to find a better picture for the lead in prep1 (tried yesterday but failed). In prep2, Holt Manufacturing Company is a good lead (maybe for another prep set). Is there any particular reason you stripped the picture and my ALT4/ALT5 for that nom? Materialscientist (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, feel free to move stuff around. Just please keep them both full up. :) No worries, Cirt (talk) 00:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Expelled members

To be perfectly frank, the reason I haven't returned to this article is because I'm mulling over whether the content is too negative for front page BLP's. This article essentially isolates one negative event in the lives of some of these BLP's, which might be seen as problematic. And certainly, I'm not keen to attract more flack to DYK given the current fracas over DYK BLP's at AN/I. Gatoclass (talk) 04:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not so much about the hook as about the article itself. I'm just not sure we should run an article that is focussed exclusively on a negative aspect of some LP's. But you can bring it up for discussion at DYK talk if you like. Gatoclass (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Brennan and Kolesar

Cirt -- Thanks for promoting the Brennan and Kolesar hooks. Both relate to U.Mich. football, and it may be better if they were in separate queues to have more variety. Just a suggestion. Cbl62 (talk) 16:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sure. Thank you. No worries, Cirt (talk) 02:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 03:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Composing DYK preps

is an art and a hard job which is hardly ever rewarded but is reprimanded every now and then .. Heck, straight to the point - your last compositions were not ideal and took time to brush up. Just to mention a few: placing File:Uribantecaparo.jpg as a lead, this and a few other promotions which ignored proposed ALT hooks - yes, I do such things myself too, but we don't want them to repeat. Another issue - the longer the hooks stay at T:TDYK the more chances to find errors there, thus there is rarely a need these days to fill up prepextra (it was made when we had 330 noms at T:TDYK). I'll leave it here and go offline. Sorry for incoherent message. Materialscientist (talk) 01:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

My tone reflected my mood which I had no time and energy to hide (I started writing one way and then was rushed to go offline). I treat you as experienced admin and cut the corners - you are one of not so many editors who have my respect, but when things go wrong one has to shout. I also needed to see your attitude, which I still don't figure for myself. You found out and fixed many "critical problems" yourself by the time I got back, kudos, things are settling. Lets get to my usual nitpicking. The tradition is to have last hook quirky (for this reason, it is often worth not putting two quirky ones in one set as we don't get so many), a strong article as the lead, and avoid two hooks on same topic in one set. That was why I changed your previous sets. Sure, we might have differences on what is strong and what is quirky, and I'll just tell what I see right away: (i) The lead in the bottom set of prepextra is weak (Ruse is an obscure town in a small country) (ii) The last hook in top set of prepextra is not quirky and I don't see a quirky replacement within that set. Materialscientist (talk) 04:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

We're getting lots of critique for featuring boring hooks (from the editors which are active or potential DYK contributors/reviewers), which is bad for the project and WP. Having strong lead and quirky end allows hiding the middle ones. And yes, regular preps composers better have thicker skin - a high-risk job for mechanical error, but its not that bad :). Materialscientist (talk) 04:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

One more thing to keep in mind when composing preps (there are quite a few) is special occasion area (imagine an editor who's nom was waiting a month to hit UK time zone for somebody's birthday :-). We've got quite a queue for 8 March and some of your preps will interfere with that - not a big problem though, we can just delay them. Materialscientist (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Pedant17

I'd be happy to support a User Conduct RFC, but I'd wait for one more bad example of Pedant17 introducing E-Prime against consensus, or of off-topic filibustering on a talk page, so that it's not thrown out as "no recent disruption, user appears to have learnt his lesson". He does seem to be backing down a little, now that we're being more explicit about only rewording his copyediting when it degrades the article, and forcing him to defend individual wordings - I think the recent RFC has shown him that if we do start discussing individual contentious edits, no other Wikipedia editor will back him up.

Drop me a line before you start a User Conduct RFC, anyway - as predicted with your last RFC, if you word the issue even slightly loosely, there is a danger that he'll take it 100% literally and give a confusing, filibustering response. --McGeddon (talk) 09:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Cirt (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've enabled email, if you want to send me a draft of an RFC at any point. --McGeddon (talk) 09:36, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Bernhoff Allen Dahl= DELETED

Hey CIRT at W:

I was deleted. Was I something I siad, or that I ate?

Love- -Bernhoff Allen Dahl, M.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.165.179.139 (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There was a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernhoff Dahl. Cirt (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Homer vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment

Still planning on finishing this? :) Theleftorium 21:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, will try to get to it soon. Cirt (talk) 21:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like Scorpion0422 got to it before you. ;/ Theleftorium 01:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Andras Chiriliuc

Hello,

You recently deleted Andras Chiriliuc as per this AfD. I certainly can't fault your close, you you had nothing much to go on there. However, the conclusion it reached was in error. A quick news search shows sufficient coverage to warrant conclusion. I would like to userify the article in order to reference it properly, but thought I would make sure you don't object first.

Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 02:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:ThaddeusB/Andras Chiriliuc. Cirt (talk) 03:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

South Park Season 1 FT

The FT passed! Thanks for all your help in getting this thing off the ground and running! — Hunter Kahn 04:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for all of your work on this project. ;) Cirt (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Peralta image

Hi Cirt. FYI, I emailed Peralta for a free image. I was successful with Andrew Russo, so I hope he responds as well. Hekerui (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I did the same, so hopefully they will respond. :P Cirt (talk) 23:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I got a response telling me to use images from the Senate website, so I uploaded File:Jose Peralta headshot.jpg and sent back instructions to send an OTRS consent form. Hekerui (talk) 10:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I haven't followed up with this, I can't see what I can say to make it clear without repeating stuff I already said. Hekerui (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Zhang Baosheng

Hello Cirt. I noticed you deleted the Zhang Baosheng article some time ago[2]. I have several good sources on this, however, and at least one other editor who is interested in incorporating some Chinese sources. Please notify me if there is anything else that needs to be addressed. Zhang Baosheng was an important figure. --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on this as a draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker

• Could you please re add the protection to this page. The Edit war has not been resolved --Whitmore 8621 (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)Whitmore 8621.

Try WP:RFPP. Cirt (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Citations

Hi, Cirt. After having had a busy couple of weeks in real life, I'm back to work on the Dalek article. I managed to purchase Howe's Transcendental Toybox, which is the authoritative work on Doctor Who merchandise, so I should be able to improve the citations for the merchandise section of the article. In the next few days I'll also work on replacing the dead links and fixing any badly formatted references.

I'm also adding a paragraph to the "Licensed appearances" section about Dalek books. But I was wondering what the best way to cite the existence of Doctor Who novels focusing on the Daleks is: should the reference contain the bibliographic information for the novels themselves, or a reference to the listing of the books' details in Howe's Transcendental Toybox, or both? The former is, I suppose, a primary source, and the latter a secondary source, which would lead me to think that it would be better to cite the Toybox; but on the other hand, the original novels are more widely available than the reference work. I can provide citations for either or both, but I wasn't sure which would be best. Can you advise? Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd say secondary sources are better, but both is probably best. ;) Cirt (talk) 06:07, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Will do — thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The Late Shift II

Posted the original source on The Late Shift II news (Gawker). JAF1970 (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Reposting of PQ Systems

I was looking for some final input on this article. Also i was hoping to repost this some time soon so any input you have will be greatly appreciated. Bmxoffspring99 (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Does not seem to satisfy WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand, the article references multiple independent secondary sources. Could you elaborate? Bmxoffspring99 (talk) 14:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry, I do not agree. Most seem to be spammy press promo releases. Feel free to go to WP:DRV. Cirt (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Article on Insidesales.com

I think this article InsideSales.com fails WP:COMPANY - would you have a look? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Predictive (talk • contribs) 23:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Cirt (talk) 06:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Brooks

Hi, thanks for closing this AfD. However, you forgot to delete the second article associated with the AfD, Julia Porter (Law & Order: Criminal Intent). This article was included in the judgment of the AfD. Is there any way you could go back and delete it? Thanks! Redfarmer (talk) 02:57, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Cirt (talk) 04:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK

Hey, I wanna get my first DYK and was wondering if there is anything on Blackhawk Hotel or Kahl Building that might work? There really isn't anything too exciting, so I don't really think there is. CTJF83 chat 06:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Would have to be expanded over 5x. Cirt (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

? They both meet the 5 days old criteria. Blackhawk meets the 1500 character criteria, and Kahl is close to that. CTJF83 chat 21:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, I see they are both new. Yes, they should do fine. Cirt (talk) 05:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

No sense in a new section....can you delete my first image at File:Kahl_Building.jpg it's too blue. CTJF83 chat 03:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

LOL, I just wanted the first of the 2 deleted, the 2nd one was fine. :) CTJF83 chat 04:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

The British Political Tradition

The British Political Tradition

Hi - It appears my article on the concept of the British Political Tradition has been deleted. Following advice from John CD, I had made some improvements and was awaiting more feedback on this important concept for those interested in Britain's political system. Would you let me know how I could improve it further and also how I can get access to it again?

Thanks

Mph326--Mph326 (talk) 15:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 15:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sea Org logo

Hi Cirt, please go ahead and delete File:Sea org.png - it's been superseded by File:Sea Org logo.svg so it's redundant.

Thanks also for letting me know about the Battlefield Earth Razzie. Good to know it's still making waves! ;-) -- ChrisO (talk) 02:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Great job!

I noticed that you've put a significant amount of work into today's FA, The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power. Great work. I know it's an enormous task to write articles that are A. Controversial, B. About anything religious, and C. About anything Scientology. To get it up to FA status is a huge achievement. Very well done. I hope that you'll continue to churn out stuff like this; it's what Wikipedia should strive to be. 98.232.51.88 (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

You are correct - it was not easy to accomplish. Thank you very much! -- Cirt (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jose Peralta

On March 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jose Peralta, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Calmer Waters 18:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of User talk:Haiduc

[3] Did you intend to delete this User Talk page? I saw another such deletion today and pinged the admin, and he undeleted, saying that there had been a "script failure."

It's gotten complicated because the Talk page was recreated with new AfD notices, so there should probably be a history merge, though, with the user being blocked, the new AfD notices don't do much good. Still, for the record, that they were at least provided, and perhaps someone watching Haiduc talk might see them, they should probably remain there. Thanks for looking at this. --Abd (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Xeno saw me comment on this and restored the page, but the new AfD notices were then replaced, probably still should be merged. Whatever, thanks. --Abd (talk) 20:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Most odd, most have been a script error. -- Cirt (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Saadamy

I think this guy is hard done by. Maybe I'm innocent, but I was just coming to UAA to say I didn't see anything wrong with this username? He was also wrongly accused at AIV of being a vandalism-only account, but his article was not a hoax. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really the most appropriate username for the site. Not sure that page is really altogether notable, either. -- Cirt (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Not notable maybe, but not bad for a newbie and certainly not vandalism - he didn't even remove the speedy tag, he quite properly added a hangon and explained on the talk page what he was trying to do. I suppose the username sounds worse with an American accent, but I saw nothing wrong and I doubt if it was maliciously intended. Unless you object I would like to give him a chance to change it, and bring his article back. JohnCD (talk) 22:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Unblocked. However, would be best for the account to work on the article, in a subpage of their userspace, as a draft version. -- Cirt (talk) 22:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll fix that. Are you OK with the username, or should we make him change it? JohnCD (talk) 22:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Best to change it. -- Cirt (talk) 22:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. JohnCD (talk) 09:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Latino Fan Club

Could you userfy this to me? I think they actually do meet GNG and are notable and I'd like to work on it. -- Banjeboi 22:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Benjiboi/Latino Fan Club. -- Cirt (talk) 03:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Banjeboi 08:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Sue May

Did you just get a nasty email from Hookahhookah? Dougweller (talk) 12:57, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

BS

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For a super-duper-double-looper, amazing, outstanding, marvelous, incredible, stunning, glorious, great, dazzaling and all around excellent 100,000 edits! Keep up the (repeat all adjectives) job!!! CTJF83 chat 19:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, very very much! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 19:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing, keep it up for the next 100,000 CTJF83 chat 19:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Bacon WikiCup 2010 Award

		Bacon WikiCup 2010 - Participant Medal
		Because of your work and dedication to expanding bacon-related content during the Bacon Challenge 2010, you have been awarded the Bacon WikiCup 2010 Particpant Medal for partipcating in the Bacon WikiCup 2010 with a final score of 94, earning yourself second place. Congratulations, and thank you for your great work! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Restoration of Softlink

Hi Cirt,

I noted my entry for Softlink was deleted, and whilst this was part of a discussion, I feel that it does warrant an entry due to the number of companies and users worldwide who use their products. It would be a central encyclopedic source for verified data. There are other similar entries for comparable products, so I am curious as to why those were passed while Softlink was deleted? (i.e. SirsiDynix, Koha, Evergreen others)

At the least could you please restore to my user page for me to work on, or even up to Softlink (software)

Is there anything else i can do to fix this up as there have been several recent article additions which may not have been noted? Thanks.Sjritchie (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The AFD was pretty clear that this was basically borderline promo/spam. Cirt (talk) 05:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

If that's the case then similar articles SirsiDynix, etc should also go, as they are all very similar in what they do and directly compete with each other. Essentially this creates an uneven standard for what researchers find when they are searching for library software. Either way I request the page be moved to my user page for review. Sjritchie (talk) 06:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really a valid argument, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- Cirt (talk) 07:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevertheless, as requested could you please restore to my user page so I can improve the article Sjritchie (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, User:Sjritchie/Softlink. -- Cirt (talk) 08:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Curious about Michael Dunigan

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Dunigan as a delete. I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. Could you explain?--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh shut up. Wiki is supposed to be encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.227.173 (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Consensus was assessed and determined to be for deletion of the page. -- Cirt (talk) 19:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

How specifically did you assess consensus and come to that determination?--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It appears that in the AFD discussion there was only one individual advocating for keeping the page - and that was yourself. -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Just to be clear, was it the strength of the arguments, or did you just count the votes and pick a majority winner?--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Both. -- Cirt (talk) 14:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your TFA

See this Raul654 (talk) 05:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 05:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Re-creation (RoschierRaidla)

Article about law firm (420 Lawyer). --Bot-iww (talk) 11:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Undeletion of Teeworlds and X-Moto

As the closing administrator on both the Teeworlds and X-Moto AfDs, I thought I'd bring this to you first as I believe both undeletions are uncontroversial, with the articles being deleted in the first place due to inadequate effort in finding sources.

Teeworlds (AfD)

Teeworlds has several leagues at Electronic Sports League Europe, nearly all games which it lists are notable.

Neoseeker covered a company which offers a play-for-cash system based on Teeworlds. The article does discuss Teeworlds itself briefly.

fr:MacPlus has an article about Teeworlds here (and in English) given its fr.wikipedia page, it's both notable on its own, and given a staff of 12, reliable as well.

TIGSource also covered Teeworlds with a sizable piece.

Cynamite, a German publication also published a review.

The game seems to primarily be popular in Europe, so the majority of sources are non-English.

X-Moto (AfD)

LinuxLinks has a short-but-unique description, features list and requirements. LinuxLinks been cited several times on other articles.

MacApper published a short review, and has a substantial staff with an editor.

FOSSwire's article is brief, but the site appears to be reliable, with commercial backing and a variety of contributors.

UpToDown has downloads and an overview of the game, and translating their about page confirms that they're both commercial and have an editorial process.

Though it doesn't confer notability, I think it's worth noting that the X-Moto site receives in excess of 100,000 unique visitors per month and has articles on many alternate-language Wikipedias.

As with Teeworlds I've omitted a number of non-English sources. Per Alexa, French traffic leads by a wide margin.

If you think either of these might be contested, I can bring them up for deletion review.

Thanks for your time. Singlemaltscotch (talk) 14:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Would be best for you to work on a draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to build upon the previous content, if you don't mind userfying them for me. Singlemaltscotch (talk) 18:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

1. User:Singlemaltscotch/Teeworlds
2. User:Singlemaltscotch/X-Moto

=  Done. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The Secretions : Undelete request

Hello, My name is Mickie Rat and I am in a Sacramento band called The Secretions. We have been playing since 1991 and one of our fans worked tirelessly to create a wiki for us, which was deleted with no warning to us. Maybe you don't think it's important enough, but it would really help us out to have this page back up. Also, try googling The Secretions and we appear on at least the first page, especially for image search. I'm going to create another one anyway, but it would be nice to not have to start from scratch. Anyway, all I'm asking is, please undelete it if you can, and please don't delete the new one I am going to start all over again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.48.52.241 (talk) 15:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Please register an account on Wikipedia. Then you can work on a draft version of the article, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 17:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Expelled senators

Thanks for the notification. Are you asking me for input, or just letting me know? If you're asking for input, please explain further, because I'm not sure what you're asking for. Nyttend (talk) 18:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Ghost wars

I saw you protected the ghost page - rightly so. There is a furious debate about ghosts and pseudo-science, and also a minor one about whether the article gives a global view. Is there a standard way to run some sort of formal debate, maybe moderated, to resolve the issue? Aymatth2 (talk) 20:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest WP:RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 20:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I started one. I am not too optimistic it will work, but worth a try. Until coming across it a week or so ago, I would never have thought the subject could be so controversial. But it sure is. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Admin barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Awesome effort in reducing the administrative workload. Bravo! Ϫ 23:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, very much! -- Cirt (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

Special:Contributions/198.188.6.56 You may want to extend the block (it's a school IP that's been blocked many times) and disable tpe or semi the page instead of full. Enigma^msg 01:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Nah, we'll leave it for now. Could extend the block if there is more disruption after current block expires. -- Cirt (talk) 01:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI

This anon IP editor 129.24.60.222 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS) ←, → has struck again. Time to revoke his ability to edit own talk page? :) --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 03:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 03:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks, did I mentioned he's one persistent bugga? :) --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 03:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Jose Peralta

It's great fun working with you on this! LOL. Bearian (talk) 04:05, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. This was the state of the article, before I improved it. -- Cirt (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Aaron S. Kurland

Thanks for the welcome. I looked at the quote template and I didn't grok that it could just be a quote with no attribution. Thanks for re-adding it and the double curly at the end. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaron S. Kurland (talk • contribs) 00:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Cantos Music Foundation

• Cantos Music Foundation · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Cantos Music Foundation is non-profit organization for education, and it match public benefits. Furthermore, it is one of important source of several Wikipedia articles including Canadian Country Music Hall of Fame, Moog synthesizers, Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, Bruce Haack, etc. If you suspect advertisement, I want to improve it. Please consider undeletion or userfication of the page. Best regards, --Clusternote (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Clusternote/Cantos Music Foundation. -- Cirt (talk) 01:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your decision. I'll improve it. --Clusternote (talk) 01:13, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Manju Gupta

Hi. Could you take a look at the above article's AfD? 14 days since it's been listed... Thanks ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 07:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 07:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 11:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

closing afd

Unless the time stamps have gotten mixed up, you seem to be inadvertently closing afds after 6x24 1 hours, instead of 7x24.(for example , [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMF balancing technique] ; remember how it used to be when admins tried to rush each other to get there first.? DGG ( talk ) 04:59, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If there is a specific complaint about a specific AFD, we could address that. -- Cirt (talk) 05:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

no, I have no problem with any specific close, or I would have said so--I merely mentioned that one to give a general time point at which you made at least a dozen such closes. I would have a problem with your practice of closing in 6 days, contrary to policy which requires 7, if it were deliberate, and not, as I assume, inadvertent. DGG ( talk ) 01:55, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see you actually did reference a specific AFD above, it was just not wiki-linked properly, and that was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMF balancing technique. As you may or may not have noticed, I subsequently (and promptly) have restored, reopened, and relisted that AFD debate. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 01:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD

Please check out: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Series of tubes (3rd nomination). Thanks. Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finishing with the tags. I was about to do it myself but I got distracted by a phone call. — Rankiri (talk) 19:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Unban request

I have a feeling that breaking Cheokho and Mahoneyj2 toys will result in a lock on the toy chest. Just to let you know that the former already managed to make an unblock request. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible socking going on? -- Cirt (talk) 21:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I can see nothing huggle's that would suggest they are still on it, but those are in my eyes definitely sockpuppets. Just have a look at their edit's - The few edits they made before today would suggest that someone is hopping accounts. No edits in 2008, both vandalism, and both managed to get entangled in he same article in just 3 minutes. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. You may wish to mention that on their two talk pages. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. Confirmed as well trough the good ol - "My friend was on my account and...". (Edit) Sorry to keep bothering you with this, but is there any chance you can see who created Cowdrey Cricket Club before it was deleted on 15 October 2007? The user suddenly added an old CSD warning from somewhere on his userpage origionating from that date, claiming he made it. Might be another sock to mark. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Mahoneyj2 (talk · contribs) created that page. -- Cirt (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again - might actually have figured that if i didn't miss the first edit make to his talk page. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Lopez Negrete Communications

Hi Cirt,

You may recall userfying Lopez Negrete Communications to User:Pink Bull/Lopez Negrete Communications at my request, subsequent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lopez Negrete Communications. I have revamped the entire article and it can now be found at User:Pink Bull/draft. The current article addresses the concerns of the Deleters at said AFD and makes the companies notability clearer. What do you think about the current article and what can be done to put it back in the mainspace? Thanks, --PinkBull 22:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Seems a bit POV, and also mostly derived from a single source. -- Cirt (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Your concerns about POV are perhaps valid because the article does not include any negative information. However, I really haven't been able to find any negative information on the company. In addition, the articles on the companies listed in Category:Advertising agencies of the United States don't fare much different in terms of positive/negative content and are all fairly positive. Regarding the sources, please take another look. The article includes eight sources: four to the Houston Business Journal, two to Billboard Magazine, and two to Advertising Age. All eight sources are different articles.

Regardless, I respect your opinion, but was hoping we can get a wider community review on this revamped article. I'm unclear on the proper forum for this discussion. Is it Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion or Wikipedia:Deletion review? Thanks, --PinkBull 02:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I looked it over again. It is not that bad. You did a pretty good job. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Does that mean I can move it into the mainspace?--PinkBull 02:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

No objections. -- Cirt (talk) 02:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It's moved into the mainspace. There's a link to this discussion at the article talk page in case anyone brings up the previous deletion. --PinkBull 02:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Regarding this [4], I've filed a SPI, there's quite a bit more to this than meets the eye. SPAs and spam articles going back to 2008. [5] - Burpelson AFB (talk) 01:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 01:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Tyne Daly

I removed the {{refimproveBLP}} tag you placed on Tyne Daly because it has 14 refs already and the several that I looked at support the text they are attached to and represent significant coverage of her rather than passing mentions. I'm letting you know since I know you're an experienced editor; do let me know if this is a problem.  Frank  |  talk  13:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

IMDB is not the best source for a WP:BLP. -- Cirt (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed not, but as a supplement to TCM, The New York Times, Jet, and Museum of Broadcast Communications, among others, it's OK. If it were the only source, or one of only a few sources...that would be a totally different story.  Frank  |  talk  13:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but most of the whole page is only sourced to a poor source. Unacceptable for a WP:BLP. -- Cirt (talk) 13:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Even when you first tagged it, more of its references pointed to a TCM biography than to any other source, so I don't agree with your assessment, but...I guess the thing to do is just improve it.  Frank  |  talk  13:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Most of the material in the article itself was to IMDB. I have moved that poorly sourced material in a WP:BLP article to the talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 13:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Given that you've moved what you considered offending material off the article, and I've now added several cites for what's left and the bit of text I re-added, perhaps you feel it is acceptable in its current form?  Frank  |  talk  15:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, much better. Thanks very much for helping to improve the article. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for List of New York Legislature members expelled or censured

On March 20, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of New York Legislature members expelled or censured, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

About article Murray Carter

Hello,

Would you be so kind to undelete the article about Murray Carter (the knifemaker)? It has been requested to be deleted by Why did you do it, with the comment that the article seemed to be written like self-promotion.

I DO think the article is notebale, considering the achievements of mr Carter. I won't sum them up here, because in the world of knivemaking an forging the man is a legend. There are dozens of people, all an authority on the subject, that can attest to this fact. Maybe the way the article was written seems a little like promoting, I will work on that. Furthermore the article is (like all) never done and needs more tweaking, but to have it deleted in such short notice....why? I've come across alot of articles that are poorer written and lack sufficient references. If you look at other knive makers articles, u can see what I mean.

Just because one is not familiar with the subject, does it has to be deleted so quickly? Though I think Why did you do it has a point in the way it was written and I am motivated to improve the article.... Thanks in advance! --RobVandeB (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, could you place the article in the following subpage: User:RobVandeB/Murray Carter? --RobVandeB (talk) 16:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, at User:RobVandeB/Murray Carter. -- Cirt (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Wiki2Touch

Can you undelete this article into a subpage of my userspace, say Saiht/draft/Wiki2Touch? I don't agree that this software is not notable and will prove so later, then ask for general undeletion. But in the meantime i'm going to improve the article, add english pictures and collect sources. THX. --Saiht (talk) 22:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Saiht/Wiki2Touch. -- Cirt (talk) 16:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Tom Cruise Purple

Thank you for your improvements to the Tom Cruise Purple article. I invite you to work on any WikiProject Cannabis pages that interest you. By the way, I see you have a gift for creating featured portals--if you are looking for a new one to work on, feel free to take a look at the Cannabis Portal! Thanks again, and best wishes! --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Tie One

I'm not entirely sure if this is the proper forum for this, but I was wondering if you could explain why the Tie One wikipedia page was deleted. Bricology complained that Tie One was "A non-notable graffiti tagger, and an equally non-notable crime victim," which anyone with a genuine interest in San Francisco graffiti will tell you is ridiculous; Tie was arguably the most prolific SF graffiti artist of the mid-late 1990s, not to mention the victim of one of the most glossed-over murder cases of that decade.

Thanks so much for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Midsummersault (talk • contribs) 06:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could work on a draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tie One. -- Cirt (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Midsummersault, as I explained both in response to your comments on my Talk page and in the Proposed Deletion, there is simply no recognized "notability" for taggers. You claimed that "...anyone with a genuine interest in San Francisco graffiti will tell you is ridiculous (that 'Tie One' was not 'notable')". As a matter of record, I have a "genuine interest in San Francisco graffiti", and have been deeply involved in the contemporary art scene here for 25 years. Indeed, I've contributed to a few WP entries on graffiti artists. However, taggers are not per force graffiti artists, no matter how prolific they might be. Demonstrating "notability" isn't as easy as just saying "he was prolific", even if you could prove that particular claim. "Tie One" was never considered particularly notable even within the small world of San Francisco street art of the '90s. What galleries did he show in? How many other exhibitions did he participate in? What critics or curators mentioned him? What books or even magazines did his work appear in? These are all questions that would be asked before accepting the claims of any artist being noteworthy enough to warrant a WP entry. Claiming that graffiti or tagging falls outside of the usual criteria for fine artists won't get you any further, because notability rests upon verifiable documentation and objective, expert opinion, which most graffiti (and all tagging) lacks. As for Mr. Lim's death: even if it was true that he was "the victim of one of the most glossed-over murder cases" (a claim impossible to quantify or demonstrate), his murder falls far below satisfying WP's standards for notability as a crime. What was "notable" about it? -two brief mentions in the local newspaper? There are 70-100 murders in San Francisco alone every year, all of which end up being mentioned in the same newspaper. How many of them end up being notable enough to warrant a WP entry? Few, if any. Again, the onus is on you to demonstrate an person's notability on WP, it is not on editors to disprove his notability. When "Tie One's" entry came before the WP Deletion forum, it was unanimously agreed that he simply was not notable. Wikipedia is not a blank wall that anonymous people can come in and "tag" with an entry on someone. It's a dictionary that relies upon factual, dispassionate information about exceptional people. Trying to do an "end-run" around the decision of the Deletion forum will not negate it, and if you revert the entry, you may be banned. Those are Wikipedia's rules. It would be a good idea to learn them before trying to go any further with this. Bricology (talk) 06:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

deletion of UCHUG

Regarding the deleted article UCHUG I oppose the deletion. I am familiar with the information in UCHUG and know it to be reliable, historical and useful. Gordon Laird (talk) 06:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a draft version, perhaps within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hi Cirt, you may wish to note that your contributions to Vladimir Correa back in December 2009 have been called into question on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Fraudulent referencing. It is a very long thread, you have been mentioned towards the end today.

Cheers, Ash (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, commented there. [6] -- Cirt (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe that anyone in that thread has called Cirt's edits into question, Ash, only yours. Cirt's sole edit was to remove the AfD template, so it wouldn't make much sense to do so. Is Ash's summary the reason for the oddly defensive comments on the ANI thread, Cirt? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I think my comments are enough at this point. I'd rather defer to others at this point, as I had already done at WP:BLPN. -- Cirt (talk) 02:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I would appreciate your opinion on the evidence that I have laid out of similar misuse of citations in two other, unrelated articles. I think both Ash and I would like to see the issue resolved and the thread closed. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, well, the tone of the debate really does not encourage users to contribute to the discussion, especially when their comments cause others to snipe back rudely at them. No thanks. ;( -- Cirt (talk) 02:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you felt that I was rude to you. I think you have misinterpreted my comments, but I get the distinct impression that there's something else going on here so I won't push it. Do you care to recommend any thicker-skinned admins who might be persuaded to take a look? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Not when you phrase it that way. No. -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you suggest a phrasing that would be acceptable to you? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

See your prior inappropriate comment. -- Cirt (talk) 02:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean. Can you expand on that? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I think it best to move on at this point in time. -- Cirt (talk) 02:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I would prefer that you communicated whatever it is you are thinking here because we seem to be having two different conversations, but if you don't care to do that, I will drop it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I would rather the latter at this point in time. -- Cirt (talk) 03:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

M Ref

I most certainly *have* backed up the POV tag with proper Talk. Removing it simply shows your bias. Proxy User (talk) 15:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:WEIGHT, you have not. -- Cirt (talk) 20:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Nivram

How is 3:1 a consensus? Especially bearing in mind that, four minutes before you closed the AfD, it was 2:1 and nobody had any chance whatsoever to address the final point made? A little bit sudden, no? I have had no chance to make a copy of the article, and would appreciate an opportunity to do so. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. Apologies if my first message seemed a little heated. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted. I thank you very much for that. -- Cirt (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

formatting

Please refrain from 'fixing' my formatting, as you did here. Thank you. Dlabtot (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you for asking so politely! :) -- Cirt (talk) 22:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Politeness is good! Thanks for responding so politely! And so are exclamation points! c ya! Dlabtot (talk) 22:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Planck Particle

Could you close the AfD discussion for me? The nominator withdrew. Thanks. :) Silverseren^C 22:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Cirt? Silverseren^C 02:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 05:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Splurt

Hi you recently deleted my page SPLURT

its actually a registered Trademark and my artist name,,

www.splurt.net www.myspace.com/splurt www.facebook.com/splurt www.soundcloud.com/splurt

i am a known and recognized DJ and recording artist.. dont understand why you deleted my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.18.164 (talk) 03:28, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you create and register an account on Wikipedia. Then, you could work on a proposed draft version of the article, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 03:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Format errors at AfD

If you're online could you do a quick tidy of Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2010_March_23? There appears to be some broken format and possibly missing AfDs. If you do a quick search for "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shy Ronnie" and "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skye Regan" on that page you'll see the entries I'm talking about. If you don't see anything, assume someone else fixed it. They're there as of this revision of the page. (I've tried format-fixing AfD before with disastrous consequences so I'd prefer to leave it to the experts.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Done CTJF83 chat 06:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Article undelete request

Hello Cirt,

Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Teechart

Coming late to the fray, apologies for missing the discussion at page review time. This is a request for re-activation of the page, I was referred to you when going through the channel at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review. I'm one of the team that authors the TeeChart library in question, so am naturally biased, please take a view in overall context.

Part of backgrounder text used in undelete request: ".. TeeChart is a non-commercial and commercial programmer's charting library in existence since 1995. Widely acclaimed and offered to the Borland Delphi community since 1995 (as profit and non-profit) and with (amongst commercial products) a free charting library product to the .NET community since 2003 (see for example http://www.steema.com/download/other_projects). TeeChart has been used in professional and academic circles for many years. A quick Google search gives 154,000 hits, more, for example, than some other similar entity types with wikipedia page entries. Other examples of this entity type would be "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dundas_Data_Visualization,_Inc." (in this case a company) and "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusioncharts" (in this case a charting library). We are unsure of the deletion criteria in the face of the existence of the aforementioned pages and the relative search-engine hitcount. Deletion comments include "I can't find significant coverage for this company". TeeChart is not a company, it is a 'much-loved' charting library. .."

More info: TeeChart has had a Wikipedia presence in Catalan since 2005 (see http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeeChart). However TeeChart is primarily english language driven having formed part of Borland's (now Embarcadero) Delphi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Delphi) since 1996 in both commercial and non-commercial IDEs. It has formed part of many hundreds, maybe thousands of student projects in its time. It would be useful to be able to put a reference-backgrounder on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmbcn (talk • contribs) 12:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a proposed draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, draft proposal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mmbcn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmbcn (talk • contribs) 12:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Please take a moment to read WP:NOTE. Does not seem to have enough secondary source coverage, that is independent sourcing. Cirt (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I've added some reference links to independent information sources Mmbcn (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry but does not look like enough. Feel free to file WP:DRV. Cirt (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, just to be sure I've understood correctly. Do you suggest I add more references? I'm not experienced with new articles, approximately how many references do you think would be an acceptable number? With thanks. Mmbcn (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes I would suggest expanding the content with more references, and formatting all the references used, using WP:CIT. Cirt (talk) 15:48, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I've added in more references using WP:CIT formats. Mmbcn (talk) 16:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC) I've corrected an erroneous link and tidied up format on outstanding references. I don't intend any further modifications for the moment. Any feedback appreciated. Mmbcn (talk) 12:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The page has no inline citations. Please read WP:CITE, and WP:LAYOUT. -- Cirt (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I've inlined most links, the overall appearance is somewhat neater. Any other points to go for? Thanks for your time. Mmbcn (talk) 00:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Rob Urbinati

I hope it doesn't bother you that i'm leaving you these messages. I'm sorry if it does. Let me know and i'll stop. But, um, another AfD. The nominator withdrew. Silverseren^C 05:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I am curious why you are coming to me in particular with this? -- Cirt (talk) 05:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

For some reason, nominators rarely actually close the AfD's once they withdraw and I don't feel comfortable with closing it myself. I'm not all that knowledgeable on the non-admin closure rules or how to do it correctly or well. As for why you, I skimmed down the list of closed AfD's and your name was one of those that came up most often, so...you win my undying AfD attention? ^_^; Silverseren^C 06:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I left you a message in case you didn't notice

Hi I left you a message on your commons talk page. Thank you MaenK.A._Talk 08:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I saw it there, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Image review?

Hey Cirt. I saw that you're also an administrator at Wikimedia Commons, and wondered if you could do me a favor? I have a DYK nom out there right now with a picture of Andy Samberg, but I was just told that the picture requires review at Wikimedia commons. I was told an admin could review it for me and was wondering if you could take a look sometime shortly, before the DYK runs out? Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 12:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Tricky, would need some way to get in touch with Isla Fisher to confirm that it is User talk:Ibanez RYM. -- Cirt (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Futurepop

Hi Cirt, when you recently closed this RfP you semi-protected Electronic body music, but not Futurepop which was also part of the request. As you can see, the IP's revert war hasn't let up one bit on that article. Would you mind semi-protecting Futurepop as well? Thanks. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Tough Mudder

Can you please explain why you deleted the Tough Mudder page? All the information was accurate and cited. What can be done about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphintastic (talk • contribs) 17:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tough mudder. -- Cirt (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ghost Wars

I just noticed protection on Ghost is due to run out soon. I started an RfC on the talk page on what seemed to be the most contentious issue, whether Ghosts were pseudoscience. The consensus seems to be that they are not, although this is not unanimous. Is there a way to get someone neutral to close the RfC with a summary / conclusion, and only then remove the edit protection? I am not neutral, since I think the whole argument is ridiculous, and that this should just be a lighthearted article about superstitions and spooks, Halloween and haunted houses. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You could post to WP:AN for a previously-uninvolved admin to close the RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 19:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I've done that. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Status paradox

AfD Discussion. Yet another withdrawn nomination. *hugs* Thanks again. Silverseren^C 20:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

There are other deletes other than the nom. -- Cirt (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, is that how it works? It has to be unanimous when the nom is withdrawn? Alright, i'll remember that. Sorry for bothering you. Silverseren^C 21:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Truce

I feel as if we may have gotten off on the wrong foot. I saw your opposition to me being a sighted editor on Wnews and I don't think you are aware of what kind of work I'm really involved in. Supporting Ash was incidental in my efforts to oppose censorship of Wikipedia. I supported Ash in restoring Carigan but also told him the article wasn't ready yet. I continued to support him through DRV because I believed the subject was notable. I know now that DRV wasn't necessary and accomplished very little. I would like to have a discussion to clear the air either on a dedicated userpage or off-wiki. Thanks! - Stillwaterising (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the gesture. I guess I was taken aback by your vociferous support for a user who was advocating restoration of unsourced and poorly sourced material on a WP:BLP, and yourself also supporting this behavior. -- Cirt (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll chalk it up to naivety of the Afd/DRV process and a sincere belief that what I was doing was right. I don't think it caused any harm, it was similar to a nuisance lawsuit done for embarrassment and to publicly air dirty laundry. I wish you had explained your closing decision when I first asked you to. You did eventually after the DRV was started and I think you came to a reasonable conclusion but did not leave any remarks previously except "the result was delete." I think this could have been avoided with better communication. I also think a standard needs to be set by closer similar to our legal system where the judge publicly explains how he came to his decision. - Stillwaterising (talk) 22:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not call me a sockpuppet

Please do not call me a sockpuppet - it is untrue and therefore rude [7]

But in the spirit of comity - I am giving you this barnstar. I had originally given it to myself after I made the edit at "The Next Three Days" [8], but now I don't think I'll enjoy looking at it very much.

		The WikiProject Films Award
		I, Uncle Uncle Uncle , hereby award Cirt the WikiProject Films Award for his/her valued contibutions to WikiProject Films. Awarded Uncle uncle uncle 19:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Uncle uncle uncle 22:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pooktre

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pooktre. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooktre (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK Tom Cruise Purple

Please join the discussion here. Materialscientist (talk) 01:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Conspiracy Journalism

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Conspiracy Journalism. 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. Jettparmer (talk) 02:14, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not dead yet...

Please see Stuck on Planet Earth. I think it must have been moved and then recreated with the old capitalization. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:17, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Cirt? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuck on planet earth, which you closed as delete... Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Dalek

I've finally finished updating and polishing all the citations in Dalek, and I've made a start on trimming the trivia and rewriting the sections which used to be full of one-sentence paragraphs (most notably the "Music" section). Could you take a look at the article and let me know how it's looking to you, and what if anything still needs work to get it through FAR? Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I commented there. -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Tom Cruise Purple

On March 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tom Cruise Purple, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Dalek/archive2

Hi, can you take a second look here? Josiah Rowe has improved the article quite a bit. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Why the delation of My Jewel?

All the issues that were raised were addressed. I'd like to know the reason for deletion. AxelKratel (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could work on a draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Aaron Saxton

I have nominated Aaron Saxton, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Saxton. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. The-Pope (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection

With all due respect, what different does 2 Weeks make? Jayy008 (talk) 00:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Time for editors to clean up the page and properly source and improve it. -- Cirt (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The page is clean, it was protected, but as soon as it was unproteced the same level of vandalism occurred, I proposed it being protected until July (for the buzz to die down) like with Christina Aguilera's "Keeps Gettin' Better" no vandalism has occurred now it's been unportected, was protected for a long time. Jayy008 (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Let us see what happens after the protection expires. -- Cirt (talk) 01:16, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Jokaroo

Hi, I saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jokeroo. Note that Jokaroo is a copy of that article and it seems reasonable that the AfD applies to this article as well. Haakon (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I'm one of the founders of Jokeroo, which was previously known as JokAroo. In previous discussions on Wikipedia, I released information showing that Jokeroo has over 150,000 members which constituted as a big enough website to be listed on Wikipedia, this was over 4 years ago. websites like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albino_Blacksheep, and ebaumsworld are considerably smaller then us and have wikipedia articles. You can verify the size of the site with Comscore, Alexa, or any 3rd party analytics. Let me know your thoughts or any questions you have so I can answer. Cpavlovski (talk) 06:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC) cpavlovski (talk) 02:40, 22 March 2010 (EST)

Feel free to work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The last page we had was simple, stating our patents, our partnerships, and ownership. I believe that was a fairly good page. Thoughts? Cpavlovski (talk) cpavlovski (talk) 01:44, 25 March 2010 (EST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.39.107 (talk)

Please read WP:NOTE, that is the standard. -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Open Platform as a Service

I believe the admin ruled to "keep" Open Platform as a Service yet you deleted it. Am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.181.145 (talk) 03:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The consensus was to delete. -- Cirt (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand what it means when users write "keep." However, what does it mean that the Admin entered "result=keep" in the (non-visible) source notes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I do not know to what you are referring. The result was delete, not keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Platform as a Service. -- Cirt (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No, the result was keep by the admin. You were the one who deleted the article. It was also relisted. Please undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk) 01:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Link please to this result you speak of? -- Cirt (talk) 04:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't link to it because you deleted it. It was in the source. Maybe you can pull up the history/changes? In the interim, please undelete in good faith. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk • contribs)

It is not in the history. The decision was to delete. Please move on, or register an account on Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't "the decision" really "your decision?" Please show me the history or undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk • contribs)

Register an account on Wikipedia, and you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 04:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hello

I would like to ask your opinion about the format that should be used for the localities from Romania where Hungarian has co-official status (where at least 20% of the population speaks Hungarian)

Variant 1. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 2. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 3. Romanian_Name or Hungarian_Name (Romanian: Romanian_Name; Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 4. Romanian_Name(Romanian) or Hungarian_Name(Hungarian)

There are used different formats on different articles and I think it should exist a standard format used for all of them, in order not to create mess. Can you pls. reccomend one of them?

Thanks in advance for your answer (Umumu (talk) 22:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC))

Just a random, drive-by comment, but I think Variant 4 offers the best format for neutral presentation. We deal with similar things with Japan-related articles all the time (with Japanese and English being the languages in question most of the time). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I think the above notice was spammed onto a bunch of user talk pages. -- Cirt (talk) 04:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I sent it to several admins because I wanted to get opinions from experienced persons on wikipedia, I am new and I didn't know very well where I should have posted that. Sorry if you consider it a "spam"(Umumu (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC))

Sources

Hey there! Sorry for the confusion, but I am simply reformatting the references so that they are consistent, contain no blank fields, use the proper templates, etc. I went ahead and reverted to my edited version, then completed additional formatting. Hope that makes sense. --Another Believer _(Talk) 03:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I feel confident with my citation capabilities, but I will leave the article alone if you feel I am stepping on your toes. --Another Believer _(Talk) 03:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Cannabis Portal
Go for it! I do not think any one is maintaining it, or has even looked at or worked on the site in forever. :) --Another Believer _(Talk) 03:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I am not deleting any references--I think the external link was being counted as a reference, when it does not need to be in a template format. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, just give me one sec to correct the situation. Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, calm down... I think the problem is that two references are both called "medical"... I did NOT delete a reference, one is just being confused for the other. Chill out, man! :p --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I have not removed any sources. If you control F (or search for the text of) "Daily News", you will see the reference still exists. It just happens to also be named "medical", along with another reference. Seriously, I know what I am doing, but this back and forth isn't even worth my time. I will leave the article alone, even though I am just trying to get it looking as best as possible. While this is too stressful to deal with after a long day of work, I do still welcome you to the WikiProject and hope this hasn't irritated you to the point of not contributing in other ways. Best wishes! --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External_links#How_to_link. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Suit yourself. Best wishes! --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Note

• Inappropriate use of Twinkle [9]
• Page blanking from talk page [10]
• Removing concerns regarding cite removal from article [11]

-- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, I too want to apologize for yesterday. I think this conflict was simply a case of two experienced editors working on an article at the same time and getting frustrated with one another in the process. When using Twinkle, my intentions were simply to re-apply the edits I made so that I could correct the problems--not to ignore your comments or requests. I did learn from this situation as far as how to better discuss changes to an article in the future. I respect your contributions to Wikipedia, and hope that our conflict does not deter you from continuing to contribute to Wikipedia, WikiProject Cannabis, etc. Thanks again for your comments, and best wishes! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

cf. Amaras Monastery and Yeghishe_Arakyal_Monastery

Hi,

The first article which you protected was not due to dispute but vandal who created account solely for the purpose of adding that (incorrect name to the account). There is no justification for its entry, not a content dispute but a POV pushing of name that does not belong there. Similar fictitious Azerbaijani names have been added to other geographic articles of other Monestaries and Toponyms and town names, etc... I am not sure why you protected it on the POV/Vandalized version. I suspect both articles need to have the name removed and protected, since that person has violated 3rr's and now sockpuppets with an IP.

TheKillerNite (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I suggest trying out talk page discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 18:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

You know, I do not appreciate your ignorance of the situation. If you actually look at the talk page you are suggesting for me to look at, there is a person continuing blabbering about territorial integrity and ignoring any discussion as to why it is inappropriate to include a fictitious name for a monastery in the language of the country who only performed bombing runs on them 15 years ago, and now claims as "its" through irrelevant names. Similar attempts to attack other articles, most prominently Gandzasar Monastery have been reverted and protected by administrators. I suggest you to be more considerate and not ignorantly protect pov/vandalized versions of articles.TheKillerNite (talk) 01:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

If you cannot resolve the issue on the talk page, I would recommend WP:Dispute resolution, such as WP:3O or WP:RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 01:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC

I genuinely appreciate your ignorance and apathy to resolve the issue, failing to perform your administrative duties.TheKillerNite (talk) 03:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Your rude tone is not one that would encourage others to get involved. -- Cirt (talk) 04:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

• Special:Contributions/TheKillerNite = It appears from looking at this user's edits, the account has made zero attempts at discussion on the article talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 04:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Your AE request concerning Pieter Kuiper

Hello. Please see my question at WP:AE#Comments by others about the request concerning Pieter Kuiper. Thanks,  Sandstein  22:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Deadstar Assembly

I would like to see about bringing up for debate the un-deletion of this group, as they were proven notable and valid in the past, and can only provide even more proof to support the fact upon request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 17:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Things that are in the article such as their referenced inclusion on soundtracks for both movies and video games, as well as various third party articles dedicated about the group alone should qualify them. But just in case it is not, please let me know what else can be included to ensure their re-addition.

Just an outline regarding their status:

They are listed as a national touring act in both Pollstar and Ticketmaster.

They were featured in the following BIG MEDIA - Broadcast, Film, Video Games, Radio, Satellite Radio, Online Radio

Project Gotham Racing 3

"Picture This" Movie

MTVs Punk'd episode #301

MTVs Making The Video - Goo Goo Dolls

MTVs NEXT

they've Had Significant Radio Play Internationally. I can provide the Title Codes as assigned by ASCAP

Britain Norway USA Canda

FMQB # 5 Most Added with 46 Adds (Friday Morning Quarterback - FMQB.COM)

CMJ Loud Rock # 6 Most Added with 59 Adds

"Killing Myself Again" added to AOL Radio

"Killing Myself Again" added in Video Rotation on Much Music Channel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadstar Assembly (2nd nomination). I would suggest working on a proposed draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 17:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how to do that, is there any link you can point me in the direction of that would explain it to me? Also, it would seem the original debate was way off the mark with its claims on the criteria, as they successfully defended those points over a year ago as shown in the outline posted above (in fact they had to REMOVE some references as they were told they listed too many), and only have more coverage since then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 18:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You can work on it, at User:Elblots/Deadstar Assembly. Cirt (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I started, but would it be possible for you to copy over the old wiki page to this one so I can just work from that and add/reinstate the things that were on the article originally, as this would greatly expedite the process on both ends? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 18:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for merging the old article with the new one. As you can see, I have added a few more valid references to the article. If you will please let me know what else needs to be done to prove notability I will make sure it gets done immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 19:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Most of those sources fail WP:RS, are not actually secondary sources, and/or fail WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how extensive coverage specifically about the group in print magazines are not valid, especially when providing referenced links to the specific publications (even one with them on the COVER). And what of the inclusion of the band on soundtracks? (A Major video game title as referenced on its OFFICIAL web site, a motion picture that topped ratings with millions of viewers the night of its airing, MTV shows - as heard on the samples posted from their official sources). If i were to provide the ASCAP info of the groups radio play, would that assist? (I don't ever see those things posted on any other bands entry). The band have headlined their own national tours, as listed on ticketmaster and pollstar. They are also on multiple independent labels in various countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.77.176.186 (talk) 22:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I would also point out that although not all articles listed are available by direct reference, they should still fall under valid status via wikipedias own Verifiability policy as listed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Access_to_sources#Access_to_sources . All articles are referenced in a way that anyone with access to the archive can EASILY find them, although not directly via online sites (however MOST are), but issue and page #s are listed where applicable.

Is there any update on this review? Info is being added every day that has been showing increased validity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 19:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Most of the cites used appear to not be from independent reliable secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 05:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

As discussed in our original deletion review, the publications listed ARE in fact viable sources, not run by or associated with the group at all in any way shape or form. Maybe not US based, but magazines such as Zillo (which incidentally has been in rotation since 1992), De-Evolution, and Orkus are in large rotation in EU and the band has been featured extensively in them, several times in some cases...as referenced by the requirements of Wikipedia. I can post scans of the articles if that would help, but I was told last time that image scans of an article do not qualify as a valid reference source. Blog sites such as Blabbermouth.net are run by a MAJOR music label (in that particular case, "Roadrunner Records"), and as linked in the article, the group have gotten coverage on there on numerous occasions. The coverage in R.A.G. magazine is also non-trivial, but some argue about the validity of it as a source (as it is sometimes considered regional depending on which moderator reviews it...I've seen it go both ways). Again, all of these articles (ALL media mentions listed in fact, are properly referenced so it can be reviewed).

I also would like to know how the groups inclusion on 2 Major soundtracks do not qualify them? One is for a video game (Project Gotham Racing 3) that even lists the band on its official site, and the other is for a Major motion picture (Picture This) which also lists the band as a contributor of the soundtrack.

The band does also get national radio airplay, and as stated earlier I can provide the ASCAP data if required (but again, seeing how I've seen no other band on Wikipedia require such measures...I don't see why you'd need it).

Them being listed as a Premium member on Vampire Freaks is a status set by the site and the site alone. It can not be bought, and it can not be self made. Basically, the site agrees that the group is notable enough to be listed as premium by their standards. If you are not familiar with the site, its a Social site, similar to Myspace, geared directly for the Genre that Deadstar Assembly are associated with. Review the site yourself if you'd like, and you will find a list of bands, but only those verified by the community itself to be premium are listed as such.

Although not a media source, there is also a long list of major equipment companies that endorse the group. (again, each one referenced)

Their music videos are on rotation on various internet outlets such as AOL Radio, and also have thousands of views (and more than 1000 non-band submitted videos) on youtube and other hosting sites. A simple search will validate that.

They are globally distributed via various outlets (again, a simple search will validate that), as well as on all major online music sources in the US (Amazon, FYE, iTunes). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 06:46, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry but the majority of sources are just links to things like myspace, youtube, and even other wikipedia articles - all inappropriate and fail WP:RS. Those all need to be removed. Cirt (talk) 14:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I shall remove the Myspace and Wiki entries, but those are very little in the scope of things. Dockyard, Pure, Zillo, Project Gotham Racing 3, Rimfrost, Darlklands, Orkus etc etc etc...are all notable sources, as has been discussed in our PREVIOUS deletion review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 16:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

All "offending" links have been removed par your request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 23:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there any progress being made in this debate? If you would review the sources, I believe you will find them all notable (as was proven in the bands first review for deletion over a year ago). Not to mention their inclusion in soundtracks on top of it all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 17:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Try formatting all of the citations, using citation templates listed here. That will make it easier to evaluate. Cirt (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Will get on this asap (most likely tomorrow). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.131.46 (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Still working on it, I'm trying to make sense over how that citation tag works... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 02:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok...got a start on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Elblots/Deadstar_Assembly#Media_coverage (if this isn't the correct way please let me know). As you can see they are valid sources (magazines, video game, movie, and TV). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 05:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

No. I meant format this section [12] with WP:CIT. Cirt (talk) 15:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok..gotcha. Will update. One question I have however is that it seems that even when following the templates exactly how they are in the page you posted, it still doesn't link the article titles to their webpages (as I feel that would be helpful in proving notability). For example, the following shows up only as text where as if you look at the actual code, I have put all of the fields in according to the template. If you could fix this one so that I may go ahead and copy/paste it and apply it to the rest, that would be of great help...EXAMPLE: "Deadstar Assembly - Bizarr und intemsiv". Zillo. No. 05/2006. May 2006. pp. 12–18.

As you see..it only posted text and no link even when I included a URL in the code. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 17:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

You may wish to ask for more help, at WT:CIT. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Fixed and updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 17:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The References subsection does not have those cites formatted. I still see lots of bare links. I see inappropriate circular referencing to other Wikipedia articles. I see "citation needed" tags for wholly unsourced info. Cirt (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed all bare links as well as any links pointing to any other wikipedia entry. Let me know any other specific areas you see that aren't set up correctly, and if possible an explanation of why it isn't adequate. I thank you so much for your patience in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 19:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Please format with WP:CIT, and please fill in as many fields as possible that you know of info for, in those cite templates. Cirt (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

all but 3 of the references are listed using WP:CIT as per your request. All available fields have been filled out as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 19:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Wrong, I still see some that are just a link with a name, not enough information, and a few that are just bare links. Cirt (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

This is where I am confused. I understand the part with the link with a name (I'll work on fixing that), but the bare links, although not all point to a direct article, they point to the place where either the article is listed/mentioned or where the band itself is listed/mentioned as part of the entire publication (not all publishers wish to make their articles free for web). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 20:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Who wrote the article? Title of the article? Publisher? Date of publication? Page numbers? Cirt (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks :) I had filled in the ones that I had off hand (as you see a few of them do have that info listed), but am going to contact the bands resources to fill in whatever extra data they can provide where missing. Sorry for the mess, it's a lot of info for me (a user) to learn regarding the policies of the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 20:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a side note here while I wait for more details to fill into the cites: Not all articles list a writer, as can be seen from these scans: http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670702 , http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670704 , http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670705 . I will however provide whichever info I can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 00:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

As you can see, references 5-22 are fully sited (as much as possible with the information available), and I hope that is enough to begin the review for reinstatement. As for the rest, If I am unable to get the rest of the details, I will remove them as they don't meet the requirements of Wikipedia, just waiting to see if the details can be obtained or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 02:59, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Any way to get a status update on this entry? The references have been cited to the best they can be via what information is available, and I feel that with the various publications and soundtracks the band has been on, they pass the minimum criteria for inclusion on wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 14:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

You are mistaken. I am still seeing a lot of bare links and references with only a link and a name, not enough information for the cites. See my queries above about this, already. I said this before, above. I specifically named the various bits of information that is missing. -- Cirt (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Removed bare links. The only 3 that are still there..2 are the websites of the record labels the band are on, and the 3rd is a direct link to show proof of the bands inclusion on a soundtrack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 04:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, this does not look all that bad now. -- Cirt (talk) 01:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Glad to hear it :) Let me know if there is any other things I need to fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 16:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Request to fix fleshlight links

Can you fix these references? - They go to a site selling fleshlights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada reference number 3 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas reference number 101

Keep your fork, there's pie was nice enough to fix one such problem, but I don't want to pester him or her with more of them.

Thanks! Uncle uncle uncle 21:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? -- Cirt (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure - clicking on reference number 3 at the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada - specifically here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada#cite_note-cultural_influences-2 takes you to a page with text: "People who visit this site are also looking for: is fleshlight realistic, fleshlight giftcards, original lady fleshlight male masturbation, muscle fleshlight jack off, flesh light free videos, fleshlight clips masturbate, how to make your own homemade fleshlight, fleshlight sitelpk, how does fleshlight feel, fleshlight sales, my fleshlight movie, fleshjack, fleshlight ribbed review, fleshlight cheep, wiki fleshlight, gay flesh lights, cumming in fleshlight, fleshlight super ribbed sleeve, fleshlight changes, fleshlight can."

The reference for Indigenous peoples of the Americas is similar.

Uncle uncle uncle 22:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Please remove them yourself then. -- Cirt (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll see if user:Keep your fork, there's pie will do it - he or she was nice enough to do one of them and I didn't want to pester him or her with the others. Do you know anyone else who could do it? Is there an edit request page for reporting issues that should be fixed?

Thanks, Uncle uncle uncle 22:16, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

You can edit the pages yourself. -- Cirt (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I think that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_broken_or_outdated_citations "{{citations broken}}" template is what I can use - but the template doesn't seem to have a place to show which citation is outdated. "Articles with citations that are broken because the external links are defunct or outdated, belong in this category." Uncle uncle uncle 22:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, I suggest you try WP:Help desk. -- Cirt (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll see what works - thanks. Uncle uncle uncle 22:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for box on the ear

An editor has asked for a deletion review of box on the ear. 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. Philly jawn (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for article protection

Thanks for this edit on Maria Anastacia Keogh[13]. Now I can sleep peacefully. Smile. Piano non troppo (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

You are most welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

DyK

{{trout}}

For letting File:Luna damas-romanas.jpg get on the main page for over an hour unprotected. β^_command 12:32, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought a bot takes care of those tasks these days. -- Cirt (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

There was at one point but its been down for ages. β^_command 00:18, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Not worth a "trout", you could have just politely informed me of that fact. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The Marriage Ref

You're welcome. The only hard part was to figure out where to say something, there was so much complaining all over the entire discussion page. There were any number of places where I could have pretty much said the same thing I did. Sergecross73 (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that is understandable. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Help

About a week ago, you blocked IP 71.60.108.14 from vandalizing Days of our Lives related articles. Now he/she is back at it, adding ridiculous unsourced wrong speculation to many, for example Adrienne Johnson Kiriakis. Your assistance is again required to put a stop to this. Thank you very much. Rm994 (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Best to post it to WP:AIV. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

When I did that, they told me it was a content dispute. I disagree. It's someone adding unsourced wrong information to many articles, as well violating the biographies of living persons policy. Thanks. Rm994 (talk) 04:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

In that case, try WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 04:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thank you :) Rm994 (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hello Cirt. Can you userfy the deleted articles Dungeon Demo into User:White Shadows/Radiohead demos for me? I'm thinking about getting all of these deleted/redirected demos into one properly sourced article. Thanks!--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 18:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The same goes with Shindig Demo and Woodworm Demo.--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 18:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you ;)--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 19:12, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Battlefield Earth screenwriter apologises

Well worth a read! [14] Let's figure out how to work it into our article... -- ChrisO (talk) 07:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petrolsoft Corporation

I was wondering if you could look at this an offer an opinion. - Stillwaterising (talk) 16:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, would rather not. Perhaps I could close it at some point later. -- Cirt (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if you could consider yourself truely neutral considering I'm a primary contributor? - Stillwaterising (talk) 13:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Nod, in that case, might be best to avoid participating, in either regard, especially since you asked me to, in a post to my talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Reactivate article on David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher)

I missed the discussion on deleting the article on David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher). I am requesting that this article be reactivated so I can improve its content and bring it up to standard regarding the requirements for notability. David C. Lewis has many accomplishments that were not sourced or even mentioned. I can rectify this shortcoming. --Ketuwatcher (talk) 13:16, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest you work on a draft proposed version to argue for WP:NOTE, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. Where can I find the text of the David C. Lewis article that was deleted? --Ketuwatcher (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Ketuwatcher/David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher). -- Cirt (talk) 18:37, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Self-replicating machines

Thanks for putting a semi-protect on Self-replicating machine - that's a good call because the article keeps getting changed by socks of banned User:Fraberj. But were you aware that you protected it just a couple of minutes after one of those IP's reverted it back to the "bad" version of the content?

I know it's only semi-protected, so I could fix this myself - but I didn't want to do that if you had deliberately intended to choose that version.

I would recommend rolling back to the last version by Daedalus969.

Thanks for looking into this sorry mess. SteveBaker (talk) 13:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

You can fix it. -- Cirt (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello, I was wandering if you could help me This user has gone through all of Mariah Carey's articles and inflating all the sales to unrealistic levels, it's annoying having to go through and deflate them after, I've left around 10 warnings, can you issue a block please, thanks. Jayy008 (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Please, use WP:AIV for this. -- Cirt (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! can you tell me why it's "red" when it's reported and says (page does not exsist) is that something I've done? Because all of them are the same Jayy008 (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Done it, thanks in advance. Jayy008 (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Free Speech, "The People’s Darling Privilege"

On March 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Free Speech, "The People’s Darling Privilege", which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The Kate Kennedy Club

Dear Cirt, I write with reference to your recent deletion of the article on The Kate Kennedy Club. This is an article that I would greatly like to see restored in the light of the significance of The Kate Kennedy Club and its activities. The Kate Kennedy Club is renowned as one of the most exclusive gentlemen's clubs in the world, and is referenced in several published books, many other Wikipedia articles, and many articles that have featured in national press. One only has to type the club's name into Google to see its significance in Scotland as a steward of one of the UK's greatest processions, its worldwide reputation as a gentlemen's club, and it's reputation as one of the most active student club's in St Andrews. The Kate Kennedy Club exists to preserve the Kate Kennedy Procession which dates back to the 15th century. This Procession remains a key feature of the calendar of both the town and University of St Andrews as a result of the Kate Kennedy Club. Furthermore, the club remains committed to its three aims, and is one of the most active clubs at the University of St Andrews. This is highlighted by the many events that the club organises for the benefit of the St Andrews student population including the two biggest balls in the country. Furthermore, the club is renowned as for its charitable works, giving away approximately £15,000 to charity every year, Finally, The Kate Kennedy Club is renowned as one of the most exclusive gentlemen's clubs in the world (according to wikipedia, among other sources!). Numerous other gentlemen's clubs and societies have articles devoted to them on Wikipedia - eg. the Pitt Club, The 16' Club, the The Strafford Club etc. I see this as a positive thing in the light of the interest they attract, but so many of these club's have considerably less history and are also considerably less active than The Kate Kennedy Club. All of this goes to show that The Kate Kennedy club is more than significant enough and attracts enough interest to merit its restoration on Wikipedia. Many more secondary sources can be added to the article to add to its credibility and further verify it, and I do hope that this can be done after its restoration. I look forward to discussing this issue with you further, and seeing the articles restoration soon. Sincerely. Rdg22 (talk) 23:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest you work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Family Guy Terminator Parody

Hi,

I'm not sure how to cite the omission but it's definitely not in the UK boxset. Perhaps you could buy a copy and check for yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riksweeney (talk • contribs) 07:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

That would be WP:OR. -- Cirt (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

OTRS-related help

While deleting images in the subcategories of Category:Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status, I encountered File:JimWilliamsAuthor.jpg, which has a tag saying that OTRS received a permission email that was insufficient. Is it proper to delete images with insufficient OTRS emails without first recording the OTRS ticket number? I've never encountered this situation before, so I'm sorry to have to ask what might be a simple question. Nyttend (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Lost Star Productions

I ran across this today and it looks like it is supposed to be deleted after an AFD... maybe got moved? LilHelpa (talk) 13:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

100,000 milestone

Here is a cheer to you Cirt, you have reached your 100k edit milestone! (*gasp* OMG!! 100 thousand?? 0_0) Congrats in making it so far and thanks for your time and valuable contributions! Best regards, —Terrence and Phillip 14:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

A query

Hardly would have considered that "Disruptive". I mean uh, the list DOES contain primarily the names of Celebrities, so why must that be disruptive to you? Tolas of Brand (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the speedy block of that user. Also, is there a Wikiproject for movies? I was thinking like with songs, there could be a chronology on films for the lead actor. Jayy008 (talk) 17:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Human subject research legislation in the United States

You may find my newest DYK of interest. Any comments much appreciated! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, most interesting. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Actress Maria Anastacia Keogh

Uploaded image from Imdb Can we upload direct from imdb ? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3460263/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by DramaIreland (talk • contribs) 18:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Nope. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Congrats!

Congrats! — Hunter Kahn 14:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

2 IP vandalizing pages

Hello Cirt. Thank you for semi-protecting the page Black January due to excessive vandalism by 76.191.230.178 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who also went on rampage on related pages April 9 tragedy and Jeltoqsan pushing pro-Soviet POV and removing sourced data. Whenever, he's not editing and leaves off, an IP user 207.151.38.178 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) picks up on the same pages, pushing the same information. Both have had numerous warnings not to vandalize Wikipedia pages but these individuals keep on doing that. Could you please look into that? Tuscumbia (talk) 15:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Best to post to WP:AIV about these things. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Road to Total Freedom

On April 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Road to Total Freedom, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Blown for Good/GA1

Please see and respond to the notes on the article's review. Nice work.Cptnono (talk) 04:07, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Murray Carter (bladesmith)

For your information, a previously deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray Carter has been recreated at Murray Carter (bladesmith). --Falcadore (talk) 05:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

However, it's significantly different from the deleted version. Nyttend (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Aaron Saxton

On April 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aaron Saxton, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of the article Brainbread

Refering to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Brainbread Brainbread has been mentioned/reviewed on major games sites and there has been at least two articles about it in different magazines. So notability seems given to me. The other arguments for not deleting it are still the same as in the 2nd nomination for deletion. -Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.236.166.222 (talk) 02:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BrainBread (3rd nomination) seems pretty solid. What sources? -- Cirt (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. The sources are mentioned here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Brainbread and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BrainBread_(2nd_nomination) . One of the magazine articles can be found here: http://www.ironoak.ch/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=43&t=3620&pid=39934&st=0#entry39934 . There was apparently mention of the mod in another magazine, but I didn't find the reference to that. 83.219.119.55 (talk) 22:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Does not seem to be enough to satisfy WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 04:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Could you specify which aspect of notability is not given? It has been covered by reliable sources and has had a broad playerbase for a long time. It still has players, although only very few. The community is also still alive through their forums. 89.236.166.222 (talk) 09:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

RFC/Ash

Can you please see the this RFC? It seems that one of the users certifying the basis for this dispute is a known sock puppet with several of those socks already blocked. Not sure how that affects Dc's RfC but, if I'm understanding it correctly, it certainly doesn't give it more credibility...if anything, it shows some evidence of gaming. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Please advise. Thanks. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 19:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you post about this to WP:ANI, so it can be evaluated. -- Cirt (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 20:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, yes, I missed this 207.237.230.164 (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Pseudoscience

im new to this article and Im wondering where the discussions about content or edit warring are occuring? are they all in the edit comments? has no one discussed them on the talk page? if this is so, i can see why you would lock it down. Im not ready to add any sourced content to this article, but im very curious about how we resolve the editing problems here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, best to start by discussing on the talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 04:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Jay and Jack

Why was this article deleted without a consensus having been reached? The discussion was still ongoing, but the rough consensus was in favor of keeping the article. Only two editors were in favor of deletion, and both failed to refute adequately the extensive references provided to show notability. As of the time of deletion, the balance of the argument was leaning toward keeping the article. Jrsightes (talk) 06:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I saw cogent delete arguments, and the majority of the "keep" advocates seemed to just be rude blither blather and not really too coherent, for example, advocating removal of an AFD template, in the middle of an ongoing discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 13:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thomas M. Ashe

Why did you delete this page???? I want a full explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aman94 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas M. Ashe. -- Cirt (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually no. Tell me why you think its okay to delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.234.48 (talk) 05:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Amy Pond

Hi, Cirt :) In relation to this edit of yours; I don't know if you actually watched the episode—if so, the fact should have been apparent to you. If not, however, I believe that the better practice may be to leave a note on the talkpage? As I'm sure you know, all Doctor Who-related pages are organised and carefully watched-over, many are GA/FA etc., so rest assured that such queries will be responded to promptly in future! Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►person of reasonable firmness─╢ 14:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Best if we keep to the standard present already in the article, which is to have cites for information. -- Cirt (talk) 01:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

But thanks very much for the notice, and I left a note on the talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you redirect for discussion

Can you do a WP:RFD I dunno how to do it for these two articles and I don't have the confidence to do it. I wish to initiate a discussion to get a merger of List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters and List of Masters of the Universe characters Dwanyewest (talk) 15:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest asking for help at Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Anatoly Shapiro & Chana Shapiro

Hi,

You deleted Chana Shapiro after an AfD, however I have just come across my second "Shapiro" BIO in a week or so - can you look at the deleted Chana Shapiro and see if she was related to Anatoly Shapiro ? Thanks in advance Codf1977 (talk) 17:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably should be a separate AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 01:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:July_12,_2007_Baghdad_airstrike_controversy#The_video_file_is_biased

Hey Cirt. Do you think you could take a look at the link above? There is a file that we need converted to .ogv and uploaded to Commons, but none of us know how to do so. Care to give it a shot? NW (Talk) 02:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Network 21

Hi, I'm trying to improve this article and would appreciate you elaborating on your comments in the AfD. At present the vast majority of the article is based on 3rd party, independent sources, with press releases and primary sources used primarily to update older data - so I'm not sure on what basis your comments were made? Some of the press release links can be deleted actually, they were inserted primarily because an editor was challenging something specific, for which the company itself was a valid source. So, could you elaborate on you concerns? --Insider201283 (talk) 07:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I've made some further changes that hopefully address your concerns. There is now not a single statement sourced from a press release or other non independent source, though some are still used to provide updated info. Also reworded a few things that might have been considered promotional in tone. --Insider201283 (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I am still seeing a bunch of less than independent sources. -- Cirt (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

193.62.251.50.

I suggest changing the block settings for 193.62.251.50 so it cannot edit its talk page. - Zhang He (talk) 17:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:AIAV.

Where's the bot the usually keeps WP:AIAV up-to-date (or, in this case, up-to-time)? - Zhang He (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, not sure. -- Cirt (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Research Students' Conference page

Dear Cirt,

I was recently told the page had been deleted... I hadn't checked it in a while so I've sadly missed the discussion over its deletion. If it is not too late, I would like to present my view, and hope you'll re-instate the page.

Having read the discussion, I will admit, the page is close to violating NOTWEBSPACE - though I hope to demonstrate that is not true. In fact, the conference is an important part of the history, and future, of statistics within the United Kingdom.

Firstly, as too whether this is original and the sources used. I contacted many of the previous conference organisers by email, thus these are first hand accounts - it was not easy to track these people down, thus there are still many gaps. This allowed me to obtain several older conference booklets - which were very interesting in of themselves. (Sorry, forgot to put the original bit in) This is not original research, it is a record of the history of a conference in the UK I wrote up in the conference book and website (where it is still currently available) in 2008.

The page contained many external links to old websites, typically hosted on academic department servers - which were difficult to locate using google (a combination of the common acronym, RSC, and few links to those pages). I included the links so people could find these pages in the internet archive (since they will not be maintained indefinitely).

The conference has a very uncertain history, since it is not under the control of a larger parent organisation - however, it is comparable to an equally well known event, the Young Statistician Meeting, which is organised by the Royal Statistical Society, an internationally respected body, who have sponsored the RSC for many years - commonly the RSC organising committee will include members of the RSS. There will be fairly few references to this event, since it is focused on a relatively small group of people, young statisticians primarily within the UK, though also within Europe.

I strongly object any claim of promotion, the event is promoted throughout academic departments in Europe through emails and being a well known conference - within many Statistics departments in the UK, the RSC needs no promotion.

I hoped to upload the actual conference books as files - but never got round to it. These show the changing interesets of statistics, who was developing exciting new fields and the early innovitive work of the future researchers. Obviously, a well known statistician is not that well known to the general public at the moment. However, statistics is becoming a very important area in many areas of science, for example genetics. The current young researchers will be developing the methodologies of the future, and this conference can mark the beginnings of their research careers. Perhaps one day a statistician will be famous enough to get their own wikipeia entry, and they may have attended the RSC to first present their work.

I feel the page should be undeleted because the conference is the first step for statisticians before more prestigious international conferences. Looking through old conference books, many well known names in several fields of statistics have attended (again, qualify well known as within statistical research). This event is part of the history of statistics within the UK - and has grown in size over the last few years. In particular, I feel, many of the current attendees will be the big name statisticians of tomorrow.

The Rearch Students' Conference in Probability and Statistics, as well as the Young Statisticians Meeting, show case the rich statistical community within the UK, one of the best in the world. Its direct impact is not clear, but as a historical record I feel it deserves an entry in wikipedia.

Regards,

Srw1138 (talk) 08:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could work on a draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 13:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall give it a go over the weekend, thank you. Srw1138 (talk) 10:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Some bling for you. . .

In case nobody else has said it - congrats!

Wikipedia Service Award - 100,000 Edits In recognition of your accomplishments, I present you with this Golden Wiki award and thank you for your tireless effort, and commend you on reaching 100,000 edits. Congratulations!  7  05:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 19:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome message. I've been following some links around trying to learn as much as I can. I appreciate the welcome. Revaluation (talk) 16:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 19:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Disasters

If you are still involved with the Featured Portal set-up, perhaps you would care to do something about this. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 23:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course the world will not end etc. That's not the point, is it? To quote the FPR page: "The review typically lasts about one week [sic], or longer where changes are ongoing [they're not] and it seems useful to continue the process [is it?]. Nominations are moved from the review period to the removal list, unless it is very clear that editors feel the portal is within criteria [no one argues this]. Extensions are nearly always granted on request, as long as the portal is receiving attention [which it isn't - at most, people are saying that they might have time to look at it in the future]." Hmm... This portal was first brought to a director's attention in Aug 2009 (here), incidentally. And as for a sense of urgency, nobody does anything on this review without it coming up on watchlists (and sometimes not even then), as has again been proved today. Perhaps the FPR system could do with a tad teensy weensy little bit of improvement, or the criteria amended to remove the claim that non-maintained portals are summarily delisted after 3 months. Complaining at me isn't very constructive. Bencherlite^Talk 00:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps instead of shooting the messenger, and inaccurately assuming that I have anything vested in this, you could explain why the portal wasn't defeatured in November 2008, 3 months after the redlinked sections appeared? For the record, I have no links for or against any editor or project involved in the portal in question or articles within its scope. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 00:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. My initial tone wasn't perhaps the best either... apologies. Best wishes, Bencherlite^Talk 00:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I've added checking the Directory to the instructions, although I can't see that J Milburn or Yomangan ever signed up for the disasters portal. Were you thinking of the sharks portal, perhaps? Bencherlite^Talk 00:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed - the numbering went "40, 43..." - why couldn't the mistake have been at "130, 133", much less typing?! Bencherlite^Talk 01:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Chinoval

Chinoval is the coined name for a combination of quinine and chloral introduced by a German chemist as an antiseptic equal in potency to mercury chloride. Source: Transactions of the New York State Medical Association for the year 1898, pp. 519–520. Is that what the deleted article was about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambiam (talk • contribs)

Nope, it was about a corporation. -- Cirt (talk) 02:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

OTRS help

Hi Cirt, I was wondering if you could help me with an OTRS issue for an image on Commons? The image is File:2-Grinder Use Test Cut.jpg and the OTRS email was sent on March 23, 2010. It is from a state.pa.us email adress and released the image as public domain. The email referenced the Quehanna Wild Area article where the image is used, and the original location of the image online, but did not give the file name on Commons. Would you please be able to help with this? If not, could you suggest someone who might be able to? Thanks, and hope all is well with you (and congrats on 100K!) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. And thanks! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, you are very fast! I appreciate your help very much, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:50, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Disasters

That's not one of mine, and I'm afraid I'm a little too busy to take on a new portal at this time. J Milburn (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of James Roberts, Jr

I'm sorry that the "researchers" were not able to find any online verifications of James Roberts, Jr's status as highly honored sensei. I know it's against wikipedia standards, but I can say that when I was studying under his sensei, grandmaster Kim Ki Whang, we all knew of Jim Roberts reputation.

The sources may no longer be online, but Black Belt Magazine hardcopies definitely covered Mr Roberts, etc. It may have been premature to remove this page because sources were not found online. There is such a thing as pre-internet informational sources. In any case, I am pretty certain that one of the sources cited contained references to the hardcopy.

Thanks for your consideration. Thardman22 (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The main standard is WP:NOTE, which specifies requiring coverage in secondary, independent sources. -- Cirt (talk) 02:04, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Being Tom Cruise

I put it under Cinema section of Good Articles. If it should be under another heading, I hope you will move it. You did a good job on that article! Xtzou (Talk) 22:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -- Cirt (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Distant Worlds

do you think that only three people's opinion are enough for deciding such question? (Idot (talk) 01:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC))

Yes, seems pretty clear consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 02:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story. 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. Thanks, Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 17:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

v:Google_Search_and_Wikiversity etc.

hi, I would be very interested in chatting with you about projects at WV. I can often be found in #wikiversity-en I've been offline lately due to severe weather, but should be able to contribute more in the near future. --mikeu ^talk 13:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay sounds good. -- Cirt (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Imperion

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Imperion Imperion page was deleted because of an uncertainty of its existance. Here is a page prooving its existance as an actual browser based game: http://www.traviangames.com/content/imperion RT292 | ^{(Talk| Contribs)} 10:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The standard to satisfy here is WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 23:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Australian Intervarsity Debating Championships page

Cirt I am curious to know why the Australian Intervarsity Debating Championships page was deleted and if it was possible to re-post it to Wikipedia? Cheers pogor Pogor (talk) 12:19, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

It was deleted after a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Intervarsity Debating Championships. -- Cirt (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Added explicit copyright attribution article "Bob Minton"

Hello,

I added my explicit copyright information to the image "Robert S. Minton as Samurai December 15, 1998, Sandown, NH.jpg" as you requested.

This is a photograph I took myself while a guest at Bob Minton's New Hampshire home.

Bob, rest in peace.

regards, Grady Ward

Grady Ward 14:36, 11 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GradyWard (talk • contribs)

Re-creation (RoschierRaidla)

please recreate; Article about law firm (420 Lawyer). --Bot-iww (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

It appears I did not delete that particular page, it was deleted as "unambiguous advertising". -- Cirt (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:List Of Scientologists

(Tdi7457)

I had intended on removing Issac Hayes from the list and putting him into the FORMER list, due to his passing. Same with Sonny Bono. It does not make sense to keep them in that list if they are no longer living —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdi7457 (talk • contribs)

Deceased individuals stay in the regular section of the list. The "former" is for members that left the organization, while still alive. -- Cirt (talk) 19:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

RoschierRaidla (400 Lawyer)

please recreate -> user:Bot-iww/RoschierRaidla. --Bot-iww (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Already responded to this user, above. -- Cirt (talk) 19:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Art, about Law Firm with 400 Lawyer - spam? --Bot-iww (talk) 19:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Admin Lectonar (talk · contribs) deemed it was. -- Cirt (talk) 19:57, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Alastair Haines RfAr 2

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Alastair Haines 2 and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Kaldari (talk) 19:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• I listed you as an involved party since you are one of the editors that Alastair personally attacked since his last RfAr.[15] I will remove you if you like, however. Kaldari (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Removed. Kaldari (talk) 19:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Much appropriated

I very much appropriated the block of that impersonator account. That guy has a long history of harassing Collectonian and myself and vandalizing the Pokemon-related articles. —Farix (t | c) 23:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Blah! I always had trouble with spellling. :) —Farix (t | c) 00:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Info about a repeat vandal

Hello Cirt. I noticed that you blocked IP vandal 74.199.1.111 today. I wanted to let you know that this person was editing a day or so ago as Jwelch5742. As you will notice from that editors contribution page Special:Contributions/Jwelch5742 some of the same articles were being messed with. It sticks in my memory that we had a spate of this same kind of editing a few years ago (ie changing run times on films and altering awards names etc - they especially like to hit Disney films) but I can't remember what that editors user name was. Tonight I noticed this on the AN board Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#I must be nuts.... I cannot remember if the two new editors mentioned MO is the same as Bambifan but I thought that I would make you aware of it just in case. Especially since the block on 74.199 is only for 24 hours. If this info is not something that you want to deal with then I will offer my apologies for intruding on your talk page. I also thank you for your time in reading this and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 04:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC).

Um, I am not "AussieLegend" ... -- Cirt (talk) 04:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

My apologies that is what I get for trying to save time by cutting a pasting from a previous message. Apologies. MarnetteD | Talk 04:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest going to WP:SPI with this. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. MarnetteD | Talk 04:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Alpha Kappa Rho AFD

thanks for deleting it. that has been a problem article for a long time. since titopao and I have worked on decrufting it, we would have COI problems if we voted in the AFD. Is there anyway to prevent the article being recreated ever again? perhaps, warning the SPA who last recrufted it? Thanks again. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It could be protected fully, were the issue to crop up a 3rd time. -- Cirt (talk) 22:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :-)

I'm this guy, I have some wiki code experience thanks to Wikia, but none in Wikipedia. Thanks for giving me the idea, I corrected spelling mistakes and created certain stub articles. Thing is I was widely ignored, or my articles were deleted because somebody deemed them irrelevant. So yes, I'm glad I'm here, and thank you for the nice introduction :-)

Yours,

--Newbiepedian (talk) 23:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

And another introduction. Thank you :-)--Newbiepedian (talk) 23:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Undelete TeeChart

Hello, I'm writing as a followup on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Teechart. We had discussed making a draft on user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mmbcn. The initial view at page submission time was that the TeeChart Charting Library was either little known or that there may be commercial interest only in encyclopedia inclusion; the draft page intends to put some substance to the contrary. I request that the draft page be considered as contents for the TeeChart entry. With thanks. Mmbcn (talk) 09:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, try fixing the cite formatting, using WP:CIT and WP:CITE. -- Cirt (talk) 13:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Have re-reviewed format according to WP:CIT and WP:CITE. I think it's conforming now. Mmbcn (talk) 14:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello Cirt, after the changes made, do you consider this page as complying with requirements? If so where should I take it from here? Mmbcn (talk) 10:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Any feedback welcome. thanks. Mmbcn (talk) 12:19, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Too much of a bullet-like format, appears to basically be form of WP:VANISPAM. -- Cirt (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... ok. If you consider the bullet-format is the problem I'll work on it, it was difficult to get isolated reference support without coming across something that looks a little like 'eulogising'. If you consider that no matter what, the content will tend to WP:VANISPAM then there's no sense in continuing and I'll withdraw the application for the entry. Over to you. Mmbcn (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello Cirt. Not fair to ask you to comment on something that isn't there, so I've made a format change according to your comment so that you can review on actual content. I hope that information content, format, diversity of references and sources has helped to give substance to justify an encyclopedia entry for TeeChart. Independent interest for TeeChart has always been genuine and widespread. Mmbcn (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It just still comes across as spam / promo / advertising / puff piece. The bulleted lists, the hyperlinking within article text, etc etc etc. -- Cirt (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Reprinted Boston Herald articles at Apologetics Index

Note that the Boston Herald articles have a notice at the bottom of the pages:

"This special report was published by the Boston Herald, and is posted here by permission. All rights to this material are reserved. Materials are not to be distributed to other web locations for retrieval, published in other media, or mirrored at other sites without express permission from the Boston Herald."

Unless there's a good reason to doubt that Apologetics Index has obtained reprint permission, those links are not copyright violations. AndroidCat (talk) 10:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

If nothing else, I dislike the site for its 90s web style and intermixed ads (rather than on a sidebar, out of the way). Still, if moral failing and criminal convictions of the owners are a direct block against using a site, I know a certain organization with criminal convictions... :) AndroidCat (talk) 23:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The Society for All British and Irish Road Enthusiasts

Just wondering about the deletion of The Society for All British and Irish Road Enthusiasts, it seems to be quite an active organisation going by it's website http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/ Unibond (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Society for All British and Irish Road Enthusiasts. -- Cirt (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Kabbalistic Shamanism

Deletion of Kabbalistic Shamanism.

I do not understand why this article was deleted. can anyone explain why?Garudaba (talk) 21:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

It was deleted as "blatant advertising". -- Cirt (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I may have made some assumptions regarding the page on Wikipedia. I would like to know how I can have it reinstated and omit the parts that are blatant advertising. Is this possible?Garudaba (talk) 23:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I am not that computer literate but I can manage with some help...Can you tell me how I do that..get into the page you said to rewrite the article.

I appreciate your guidance.Garudaba (talk) 14:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cirt...Please let me know if I can simply rewrite the article without any references that may be seen as blatant advertising because I dont know how to do what you suggested earlier.Garudaba (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I gave you a welcome message. Please take a bit of time to go over all of the pages included in the helpful links in that message, and familiarize yourself with the website. -- Cirt (talk) 18:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Protection of North London derby

Hi there! I noticed that you protected North London derby following a request at RPP. You may not have seen that I had declined the same request, from the same user, earlier in the evening (as it happened, while the match was ongoing). I'm curious about what you saw that I didn't. The one further IP edit to the page after i declined protection (I watchlisted the page) wasn't vandalism as far as I could see, I saw it as removal of unsourced POV. Even the user in question wasn't certain it was vandalism. I'm not sure why you gave it 2 weeks of protection either, considering the history on the article. For what is so volatile a fixture (so the media at least would have us believe), that it's never been protected before would rather imply that the relevant fans don't see wikipedia as a place to goad each other.

Sorry, I'm just letting off a bit of steam, as I'm rather annoyed at the editor in question for reposting. However, would you re-consider your protection and/or length? Or let me know if you're happy for me to take it off. I'm not going to lose sleep over it either way. GedUK  07:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Decreased length of protection, to three days in duration. -- Cirt (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ta! GedUK  06:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 18:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

FYI

I see you welcomed User:Lwsears1992 - not sure if you'd seen this [article] - I'm inclined to agree with the author; no COI was breached. If you were aware, apologies for the unecessary note. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 12:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought, at the very least, it would be helpful for the user to have the standard informative links included in the welcome message. -- Cirt (talk) 13:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I agree wholeheartedly. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 20:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Reed McLaughlin

The article on Michael Reed McLaughlin was nominated for deletion on 11 March 2010, and was subsequently deleted per consensus on 18 March 2010. It seems another article by that same name was recreated on 13 April 2010. diff. Could you check to see if it is new content? Or id it is simply recreated content that might qualify for G4 speedy? Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow. You're fast. Thanks. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 19:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD template removed from PP page

An AfD template was removed from Miss Universe 2010 with this edit. The page has since been protected from editing. The deletion discussion appears to be on-going at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Universe 2010. Would you mind re-adding the template? Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll make the same request to EdJohnston, who added the PP, and to any passing admin at the AfD. I notified you because you closed the AfD for Miss Universe 2011. Cnilep (talk) 21:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Cyber Rights

Sorry, but I'm simply too busy right now to help with that article. Good luck with it, tho! Scartol • Tok 00:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

IP vandal

Hi there, regarding the IP vandal you just blocked - he's back again already with a different IP, doing the same thing [16]. Any thoughts? Do I bother to undo all his vandalism again? Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

And another, from the same location [17]. He has also just vandalised my user page, conveniently undone by the first IP. Clearly all the same person. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Blocked both. I am not yet certain a rangeblock would be appropriate. You could try asking at WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 19:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm not sure about a rangeblock either. I will ask at ANI, thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Another one [18] is already active. This is just ludicrous :( Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI report here FYI. Thanks again, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You rock

and your user page rocks too. Sorry about the edit conflict on the main news page. Keep up the good work, and thanks.

Yours, - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.15.50 (talk) 06:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Cirt (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Ian Benardo

WILL YOU RESTORE THE IAN BENARDO PAGE! HE HAS 2 CDs OUT AND HAS HOSTED NUMEROUS TV SHOWS.....WHY DID YOU DELETE HIM! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.128.218 (talk) 06:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Already responded to. See IP talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The Simpsons Star

With the Simpsons WikiProject having reached it's goal of getting every single article about a season 1-9 episode, 203 in total, of The Simpsons to GA status. With that accomplished, I am trying to thank every member (and non-member) who was involved in the effort in some way.

		The Simpsons (Annoyed Grunt)-star
		WP:DOH has reached its long-time goal of getting every classic era episode, 203 in total, to GA. You earned this because after the first topic drive was finished, there was no rush to continue, but you helped kickstart the ninth season drive, and contributed a lot along the way. Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 00:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very very much!!! -- Cirt (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

IRC

Sorry, missed your message on IRC, was working on the Adopters' list. If there is still need, poke. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 13:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. -- Cirt (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Scientologists

• List of ScientologistsWhy do you insist that Danny Masterson's raising as a Scientologist be referenced, when right above him in the list, his brother Christopher Masterson has no such reference? (along with several others in the list of scientologists) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.tougas (talk • contribs) 21:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

They should have references for that info as well, or that info should be removed as unsourced. -- Cirt (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

And this is the point where I and possibly many other possible contributors say 'fuck it' and stop contributing.... Mr.tougas (talk) 21:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Update: Removed the unsourced bit from that entry on Christopher Masterson. -- Cirt (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! I have only edited maybe 10 articles,usually stuff that does not have a neutral point of view or vandalism. You should see how awful the article was on Gerry House. I cleaned it up on April 2nd I believe, but I couldn't sign in to take credit for it. It was one of the most biased articles I had ever seen on here.It read like a PR firm wrote it! Anyway thanks for the welcome and I look forward to working on Wikipedia--BeckiGreen (talk) 04:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC).

IMS

Hi, I notice that you deleted the article on Intelligent Manufacturing Systems under WP:CSD#G11. I had already suggested some improvements to the article at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback#Intelligent Manufacturing Systems (IMS) - Global Research and Innovation in Manufacturing. Can I ask that the author be given a bit of time to sort out the problems? It is obviously promoional and it does obviously need some re-writing but the organisation it describes seems notable. I also think there is no point in blocking User:MfgGlobalResearch. He/she obviously wanted to promote IMS but, as far as I know, there is no evidence of him/her promoting anything else.

I think if you undelete and unblock, User:MfgGlobalResearch could be persuaded to produce a decent article. If that doesn't happen then you can always delete again.

Yaris678 (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

If another editor would like to work on the page within their userspace, I would be most happy to userfy it for them. But that is not really the best username, and also likely a violation of WP:Role account. -- Cirt (talk) 17:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Userfication seems like a good idea. Unfortunately, you have just blocked the user who would be most likely to want to put the effort in to get the article up to a decent standard. The choice of name isn't brilliant but we have no evidence that it is a role account. I remind you to WP:Assume good faith and WP:Please don't bite the newcomers. Furthermore, I think the fact that User:MfgGlobalResearch submitted the article for feedback suggests that he/she may be willing to go along with policy and consensus, when he/she is aware of them. Yaris678 (talk) 21:34, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It appears to be an account that is also the name of an organization, editing about that organization, and possibly on behalf of the organization. -- Cirt (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Still not assuming good faith? You are right to raise issues of WP:Conflict of interest but I would point out that it says "Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest." If you point out to the user how the interests of Wikipedia are best served you may be pleasantly surprised. The guideline doesn't even prohibit autobiography. It does recommend against it but it also suggests how to do it if you really must. Yaris678 (talk) 22:06, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed you are right, there is also the issue of the blatant conflict of interest. But that, combined with the username that is the name of an organization, is also most inappropriate. -- Cirt (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Big data - resurrected and now CSD

This is a courtesy note to say that I researched and recreated Big data. You oversaw it's deletion back in November. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Big_data This new version is substantially different and shows the concept as quite notable. jk (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 23:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fred G Sanford

My edits were not disruptive, I was simply undoing someone else's unnecessary deletion of an entire section. SmackDot (talk) 00:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Article deleted: Medicity

Hello Cirt,

I would like to recreate the page: Medicity that you deleted. When I first created it I it was poorly sourced and it was almost immediately nominated for deletion. After a several days I completely revised the article to include all reliable, relevant, credible, sources that were not to the companies site or the companies press releases. Amongst the new sources were periodicals, published analyst firm vendor assessments, healthcare news, etc. After I revised the article I had no further objections to the article, and in fact the only objection that I did have came from only one deletionist not multiple different people. The problem that the deletionist had witht he article was assessed and fixed. Please let me know what my next steps could be to have this work out. Have a great day. Colbyholbrook (talk) 18:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest first drafting a version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the idea. Ill draft it in a a subpage and ask for help from other users before I publish it to wiki. How do I know when the article is ready to be published to wiki without being nominated for deletion? Colbyholbrook (talk) 17:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

You could try posting for advice, to a few talk pages of relevant WikiProjects. -- Cirt (talk) 18:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Rhonda Harris Taylor deleted?

Hi, help, why did you delete this article? I'm confused. And was interested in improving it. thanks.Katewill (talk) 02:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

That page was deleted after a WP:AFD process, deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhonda Harris Taylor. -- Cirt (talk) 02:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Userfying a deleted article

Hi, I would like to know if you would be willing to "userfy" the deleted article Final Fantasy XV (to User:Jonathan Hardin'/Final Fantasy XV for instance). Thanks! Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 09:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 13:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 13:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

You're my man of arms

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/War of Ideas. 13 days, n countin... :)Could you take a look at it pl? ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 12:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Can wait til it gets one additional comment. -- Cirt (talk) 02:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 10:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Monarch vandalism

Cirt, User talk:Fdghdg12 another one for you. Drmies (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• And thanks again! Drmies (talk) 23:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
  • You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Are you still on call? Drmies (talk) 23:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
      •  Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Please restore Aldrin_(application)

Please restore Aldrin_(application).

1: Other articles in Wikipedia like Jeskola_Buzz reference to them. 2: The project is important for some electronic musicians.

Please restore the article.  — [Unsigned comment added by 213.229.63.90 (talk • contribs).]

Suggest you register an account. Then, you could work on a proposed draft of the article, in a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 03:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Egersund IK

Hi. You speedy deleted this article as an A7. Would you please reconsider this. I don't agree that it qualifies as an A7. I would have voted keep in an AFD. Rettetast (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Not going to restore wholly unsourced content. But feel free to recreate the page, as a new article on the same subject matter, if you can source the information to WP:RS sources. -- Cirt (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

What does that have to do with the criteria for speedy deletion. There is no CSD criteria that says that we speedy delete unsourced articles. Rettetast (talk) 08:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I have been at this talk page and met nothing but bureaucratic nonsense before. Since it is no point in discussing with you I have listed the article at DRV. Rettetast (talk) 08:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Update, [19] -- Cirt (talk) 13:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Brumski/Law of Importance

Thank you. I've copied that page and it's history now, can you delete it or should I nominate it for MfD? Brumski (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sneha Bandham

Could you be be so kind as to userfy the Sneha Bandham film article to me at MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/Sneha Bandham? I would like the oportunity to expand and source the article before sending it with your blessings to Incubation for input and review by others in anticipation that it might be returned to mainspace if shown notable enough. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/Sneha Bandham. -- Cirt (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You da bomb. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 10:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Joel Anderson

Ucucha 00:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Revert at CfD

Is there any reason for the removal of my comment here? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Did not notice it, must have been a mistake. My apologies, -- Cirt (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No apologies necessary. Happens, I had to revert half a dozen of my own edits this morning! --Richhoncho (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Tactical Hapkido

I saw you were the admin who deleted Tactical Hapkido. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and I was wondering why the 2 related articles mentioned in the AfD discussion were kept. Papaursa (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 00:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't always understand why/how things are done, so I ask. Papaursa (talk) 00:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Would have been neater to nominate all three together<g>. jmcw (talk) 11:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Note

Note that I use endless IP's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.233.153 (talk • contribs)

Not sure what this was in regards to. -- Cirt (talk) 18:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I am referring to 217.41.51.240. You tried to ban this, at 13.31 GMT,

yesterday. All attempts to block me made by you and DVdm have failed.

Blocked, abusing multiple accounts, also, block evasion. -- Cirt (talk) 01:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Request Contents of Alpha Kappa Rho

I was going through List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines and noticed that the Alpha Kappa Rho page had been deleted. As you were the administrator who ran the AFD, I believe that I can request the contents of the page. Could you please place it at User:Naraht/Alpha Kappa Rho? Thank You.Naraht (talk) 11:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thx, I'll make sure you are informed if and when I move it back to the mainspace after improvements.Naraht (talk) 01:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 01:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Fleshlight links still there

Ahoy!

About a month ago I asked you for assistance with fixing some references that were pointing to an external site advertising something called a "Fleshlight". [20]

You suggested that I try the help desk.

I posted to the help desk [21] and there was some discussion.

I checked today and see that the problem is still thereUncle uncle uncle 15:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, based on the discussion there, you might try asking Teratornis (talk · contribs) for some additional help. -- Cirt (talk) 23:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for LifeTimes

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Might as well get it straight from the horse's mouth.

Refing Portal:Volcanoes to portal review didnt work so well...I was wondering if I can get a one-up from you on it? Like, what you think needs to be done? ResMar 23:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Did you do as I suggested at the portal review subpage? -- Cirt (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, quick response. I believe it was put it on the talk page, right? Yeah I think i did. No point really, wp volcano is hopelessly, hopelessly inactive. When I took my break I took like 30% of the activity there with me lol. ResMar 23:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

What about the talk page for the article, itself? What about other relevant WikiProjects' talk pages, science, etc.??? -- Cirt (talk) 23:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Well why get expend time and energy canvassing pages when I have an expert right here? That's my stand; are you in good hands? (but seriously meeeeeepppp...) ResMar 00:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I would rather someone else deal with this, thanks. Apologies but just been really busy lately. -- Cirt (talk) 00:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

...ResMar 00:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry! :( -- Cirt (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

(ec) [dammit man ur fast! Do you have ur talk page indexed or something oO] Fine. I'll list it at the noms sometime and see what happens. Probably nothing. ResMar 00:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for pointing that out. It reminded me that I was being a little unfair in my initial AfD comment. Well-known Muslim names are difficult to search for. It's like that Moammar, er, Muammar Qa ... Kha ... -- that guy who's the head of the Libya government. I remember an AP article about spelling his name. It had something like six or eight different spellings that had been published somewhere. Not to mention Al Qae ... Al Qaid ... -- the terrorist organization. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 02:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course WP's article on The Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution has a whole section on the different spellings of his name. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Not tonight. I already spent way too much time on it today. I'll wait a bit and maybe somebody else will take a crack at it. The article still needs a lot of improvement. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the subject in the next couple of days. I expect it to keep getting more coverage and comment, but I've never heard of a situation where the originator washes her hands of the whole thing so quickly. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 02:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The Marriage Ref

I'm glad that guy got banned from the page, he was annoying and contributed nothing constructive. If you played any part of what happened to him, I thank you for it. And for what it's worth, I do enjoy checking to see if you've added anything further regarding reception and/or ratings too. Sergecross73 (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 16:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Travis Bishop article

Hello I saw that you did the final delete on the Travis Bishop article. (sorry to not jump in the conversation during the deletion review, but I was traveling then)

I created the original page and would like to rewrite it for later re-creation at a later point in time, when I've made the case of notability stronger.

I normally keep archives of newly created articles in my user space, but did not do so with Travis Bishop (except for this page User:Jmbranum/Travis Bishop which was created before the article was finished and before it received many useful edits. Is there anyway that you or another editor who has the power to do so could take the content on the deleted article and repost it at User:Jmbranum/Travis Bishop?

Thanks,

--Jmbranum (talk) 18:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks on WYTIWis PROD

I spent a lot of time on that sucker. But in the end it was a neologism and limited in scope. I appreciate your time and the consensus process you sheparded. Cheers, mate! jk (talk) 06:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:PPREV

Do you think it would be a good idea for a bot to archive the old reviews? There's quite a few without comments for more than one month still out there, and the page is getting longish... • ɔ ʃ → 00:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think that would be a good idea. Perhaps for reviews open with no new comments fore more than 3 months. You can propose it at the talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 16:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Distant Worlds

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Distant Worlds. 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. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 16:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Scott Fisk

Hello. I've recreated the article in the title from a N(eutral)POV and referenced it; I'm letting you know because you were the admin who deleted it on March. :) Regards --Jargon ^๏̯͡๏) 17:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 17:06, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Quentin Hubbard

Re "charisma" versus "bombast" for Quentin Hubbard's father, L Ron Hubbard, there's a lot of controversy about whether he [L Ron Hubbard] was charismatic or not - maybe not at all, in fact, charismatic. See, for instance the thousands of comments about Hubbard @ "The shrinking World of L Ron Hubbard" on YouTube. There does, however, appear to be some consensus that Hubbard was bombastic - an idea supported, surely by his [amazing] interviews in that video. What d'you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.1.252 (talk) 23:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Please address and explain this, at the article's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 02:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

inre Fred: The Movie

When I saw the amount of attention this article has drawn from IPs that simply hate the character of Fred, I was almost sorry I created the article (sigh). This was my first time making a request such as I did for the article.diff What would be the next step in the process if the vandalism picks up again after 3 days? Thanks --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:24, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

It would most likely get protected for longer next time at WP:RFPP. -- Cirt (talk) 02:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks much. Here's hoping it gets less attention from the vandals. --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK query

Were you going to suggest a possible DYK and nom at T:TDYK for Everybody Draw Mohammed Day? I think an interesting one might be utilizing a fact from the article involving either Michael C. Moynihan, or Kathleen Parker. Thoughts? -- Cirt (talk) 15:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Update: Now nominated, see here. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe that it was not 5x expanded, but rather 3x expanded betweeen 27 and 28 of April, but if it is declined for that reason, you may say you have waited until the deletion request is closed. Good luck!--Mbz1 (talk) 21:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

RfPP

You're quite welcome and I meant to drop you a line earlier to inform you. I wonder if you could do me a favour? I only got the mop a few days ago, so I wonder if you wouldn't mind taking a few minutes to take a look at my RfPP decisions- I'd like the opinion of some more experienced admins on how they would have handled the requests and how that differs from my own handling of them. Thanks for your time. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Seems pretty good, so far. :) -- Cirt (talk) 20:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Kidstart deletion?

Please can you advise why Kidstart was deleted?

If you read through the history you will see that the page is currently being worked on to fit the Wikipedia guidelines.

The speedy deletion tag was removed hence I thought I had a little time to work on this plus in the UK we have a bank holiday today.

I dont see much difference in this entry and the Quidco or Top CashBack entry other than on this site you actually save money for children / charities

Category:Reward websites

As I said im happy to amend as per guidance given.

Emmamme (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Which page in particular? What was the specific name of it? -- Cirt (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The article was called Kidstart and you deleted it today.

Emmamme (talk) 21:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KidStart. -- Cirt (talk) 21:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Im confused though as per my discussions with fetchcomms I have been working on notability and looking to add further citations.

I can add further information on the process / how trust funds work etc if that would help?

Would I be best to rewrite and re post?

Emmamme (talk) 21:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No, at this point it would be more appropriate instead to work on a draft proposed version, within a subpage of your userspace. For example, at User:Emmamme/Sandbox. -- Cirt (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Do i need to place a special tag to say it is a draft or would that be obvious. Also is it easy to make the approved version live from this subpage?

Emmamme (talk) 22:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, I think you can put {{construction}} on it. And also {{userpage}}. -- Cirt (talk) 01:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Kidstart

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kidstart. 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. Emmamme (talk) 22:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Bloody Valentines

Hey, Cirt, I was doing some {{hangon}} patrolling and came onto this article. I found his hangon explanation sympathetic, though insufficient, and was going to WP:USERFY it to preserve his code and suggest that it be moved to Wikia, but when I looked at the talk page of the creator, Wolves95, I noticed that he had fantasy football articles previously deleted and was someone you blocked some time back. I'm now suspicious of his explanation and thought you might have some history about it and/or might like to take a look and/or process the speedy. In any event, it's your call. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 21:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, great job

Great additions to the "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" article, and thanks for bringing it to DYK. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries, and thank you for thanking me! -- Cirt (talk) 01:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Crème de la crème

Do you mind if I restore this to the longstanding Wiktionary soft redirect? The soft redirect to the Wiktionary definition of the phrase had been in place for over 2 years. The redirect to the magazine had replaced it for less than a month when the magazine was AFDed. - TexasAndroid (talk)

No objections from me. :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

cosleeping

what did you delete a nice article for?Tectaal (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How the Stats Really Stack Up: Cosleeping Is Twice As Safe. -- Cirt (talk) 12:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Undelete TeeChart

Hello, I'm writing as a followup on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Teechart. You had suggested making a draft on user page: User:Mmbcn and later a re-work with attention to increasing of references and inline Cite format. The result wasn't considered satisfactory at that time, leading to your comments at the end of the last conversation as ":It just still comes across as spam / promo / advertising / puff piece. The bulleted lists, the hyperlinking within article text, etc etc etc."

I've made changes to try and bring it more into line and reopen the request for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Mmbcn (talk) 09:56, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks a little bit better, though there still appears to be lots of unsourced bits. -- Cirt (talk) 12:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe DYK

Hi Cirt, what do you think about nominating Everybody Draw Mohammed Day for DYK?--Mbz1 (talk) 05:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Should wait until after the AFD has closed. Great idea. -- Cirt (talk) 05:47, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The rules of DYK allow to nominate an article, which is new (not older than 5 days) The article was started on May 1. If it is to be nominated, it is to be nominated now. Once I nominated one of mine articles that was proposed to be deleted. It was promoted after the deletion request was closed. With the article in question the consensus to keep is very clear.Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see the deletion request is closed.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay sounds good, no objections. -- Cirt (talk) 13:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

You said it was a great idea to nominate the article for DYK. Now, when I read the duscussion about the nomination I am not so sure anymore :) Good luck!--Mbz1 (talk) 02:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the words of encouragement ... :P -- Cirt (talk) 02:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome.

Not a problem! - The Bushranger (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion: Merging the articles for "Hyperplane" and "Flat"

• Hyperplane
• Flat (geometry)

I'd like to discuss the possibility of merging these two articles. Your opinion on this matter is welcomed: Talk:Hyperplane#Merge to Flat (geometry) Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 20:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)