User talk:Alden Loveshade/Archive 2 2012 01 to 2019 10

Wikipedia strike[edit]

I hope the strike/blackout worked to stop SOPA and PIPA. My associates and I striked with our sites as well. Alden Loveshade (talk) 06:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think about the deletion notice you received?[edit]

Hi Alden Loveshade,

In November you received a message about either "Nomination for deletion" or "Proposed deletion" of an article you created. I'd like to ask you a few quick questions:

Was the message helpful? Were the instructions clear and easy to follow?
If not, how do you think the message could be improved?
What do you think about the deletion process in general? Do you understand how to contest a deletion?

You can feel free to answer on my talk page or send me your response by email (mpinchukwikimedia.org). (I won't quote you or link your answers to your username if you don't feel comfortable with that.) Your feedback is incredibly useful for improving the content of deletion notifications, so please take a minute to think about and answer these questions. Thank you! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cartel de Don Juan Tenorio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, for a bot you're pretty smart. I'll go fix it. Alden Loveshade (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

S. John Ross[edit]

Actually, that shouldn't be a problem at all, and you didn't do anything wrong. Since your version is substantially different from the one I have saved in Draft space, I think it will be fine to just merge what I have into your page. I will do that momentarily. BOZ (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It took a bit of work, but it looks like everything with the various S. John Ross pages is in order now. :) Since you did a pretty good job with the game designer article, if you have anything to add to any of the articles on this list page, we may be able to get some of them back into article space. :) BOZ (talk) 13:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the info and fixing the things I didn't know how to fix! I see some people in your drafts list I'm familiar with that in my opinion deserve their own article. I'll check them out as I have time. Alden Loveshade (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that you were acting in good faith and did some good work with the article, so I didn't mind fixing it up. However, in the future, the thing you want to do when moving a page to a new title is to use the "Move" feature; if you aren't sure how to do that, someone can help you. We use the move feature instead of copying and pasting the content on a new page, because that allows us to keep the attribution information (who else edited the article and when) intact. BOZ (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've helped with a few wikis, and their rules are all different so sometimes I don't remember which is which. Next time I'll do a move. Alden Loveshade (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for the draft pages, you can feel free to work on them in any reasonable way possible. Some need a lot of work, but some are not too far from being ready for publication. If you can add more reliable sources to any of them, it would be greatly appreciated. BOZ (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help and advice! Alden Loveshade (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Which ones in particular do you think you might have something to add? I'm definitely excited to get them into article space. :) Did you know that Rick Loomis was sent to AFD after I restored and worked on it? It was Kept because we found even more on him, but the last thing I want to see is any of these drafts get deleted again. A lot of them were previously deleted articles, and the others are drafts that have never been articles (yet). BOZ (talk) 20:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Loomis? Really; glad it was kept. Actually, I did the S. John article because I've been a fan of his for several years and noticed he didn't nave an article here. I may be adding more sources to it soon. I should confess that we got to know each other, at least by email (he actually contacted me first).

Unfortunately, my writing time at Wikipedia is necessarily limited--right now I'm editing two books, working on an article, etc. But I know (and own) some of Steven R. Marsh's work, so that would probably be the next thing I'd tackle on the drafts list. Obviously you know better than me, but it looks to me like Draft:Stephen R. Marsh is pretty close to being an article if it has sufficient and "worthy" references. Alden Loveshade (talk) 04:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait; just realized there are two different prominent Steve Marsh's in roleplaying land. I'm going to have to figure out who is who. Alden Loveshade (talk) 04:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No rush at all! I imagine these pages will all be here for months or longer. Yes, that is something interesting about the two Marshes. It started off with this mess and I had to sort them out; fortunately someone else wrote another draft for one of them so that helped. Steven R. Marsh is the one who worked for TSR, and the "other guy" worked for Steve Jackson Games - hope that helps! BOZ (talk) 13:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another user helped me out with Stephen R. Marsh to get it back into article space - although anything you can add there would be terriffic as well. :) BOZ (talk) 19:37, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'll check it out when I can. Alden Loveshade (talk) 21:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David A. Trampier could use some help. :( BOZ (talk) 15:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow; I've been dealing with both finalizing the Ace of Hearts for the Flying Buffalo Origins Famous Game Designers Deck and dealing with some family emergencies, so haven't checked in here and didn't even know he had passed away. His cover for the AD&D Players Handbook is an iconic gaming image, one that has stuck in my mind for many years. But it looks like the article has already gotten some updates. Alden Loveshade (talk) 21:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Tramp's article is indeed in better shape. Anywhere you can help out is great. :) BOZ (talk) 03:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Alden Loveshade. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Alden Loveshade. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Alden Loveshade (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20328 was submitted on Jan 14, 2018 22:45:33. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RPG bio articles[edit]

Hi there, Alden Loveshade! I know that you have worked on RPG bios before, so I was wondering if you have anything that can be used to improve anything at User:BOZ/Draft pages? Anything you can do for any of them would be great, and I can restore any of the redlinked ones if you have sources for them. I would say that of those, Adam Tinworth and Geoff Grabowski may be the closest to being ready for restoration, but really anything you can do for any of them to push them along would be progress in my mind. BOZ (talk) 01:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just glanced at your page--you've done a lot of work! I'll look more at the articles. On your user page saw Rick Loomis had been speedy deleted? I know it's back now, but the original must have been terrible. As head of Flying Buffalo, he's such a big name in the field (so I'm biased; my group designed the Ace of Hearts in FB's last poker deck (2014)).

Before I got your message, I did some edits to Mazes and Monsters, but it could still use some work. I finished watching the movie about 10 minutes before I started editing. A lot of people seem to see the film as anti-RPG propaganda, but frankly I didn't see it that way. Alden Loveshade (talk) 19:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just did some little edits to Draft:Adam Tinworth, nit-picky stuff like capitalization, italics, removing stub stags. Alden Loveshade (talk) 21:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, anything at all is appreciated, even "little" stuff or cleanup. :) BOZ (talk) 01:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UB[edit]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Alden Loveshade (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23045 was submitted on Oct 26, 2018 01:20:42. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 01:20, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Alden Loveshade. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Alden Loveshade. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tom King Infobox portrait discussion[edit]

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting your opinion[edit]

Hi. A conflict has arisen on the Adam Hughes article. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock please[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Alden Loveshade (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have a Wikimedia wide exemption to being autoblocked for an IP range--but that exemption is now being ignored/overruled here. I would appreciate it if that would be changed as I have some edits I want to make. Thank you.

Decline reason:

decline?Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption#Requesting_and_granting_exemptionBeing granted IP block exemption on the English Wikipedia requires "good cause". That's generally seen as more than "I want to make some edits". See Wikipedia:IP block exemption#Requesting and granting exemption on how to request that right. Huon (talk) 01:25, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Alden Loveshade (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #27418 was submitted on Nov 01, 2019 19:00:24. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 19:00, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IP block exempt[edit]

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in. This has been granted for 3 months after which time you will need to re-apply for it. I am only able to grant it for the English Wikipedia and please be aware that after 3 months there is no guarantee that it will be granted indefinitely.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions. Inappropriate usage of this user right may result in revocation. I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. 5 albert square (talk) 10:47, 2 November 2019 (UTC) -- 5 albert square (talk) 10:47, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the exemption. I must confess, however, I don't understand why, when I already received a Wikimedia wide exemption a few years ago, I'll have to reapply for this in three months. Alden Loveshade (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]