User:BD2412/Archive - Deletion (second 50)

{| width="100%" style="border-spacing: 0px"
 * class="MainPageBG" style="border: 1px solid #003350; background-color: #cef2e0; vertical-align:top; text-align: left;"|

I have archived my various deletion-related talk page discussions on this page. This includes general discussions of deletion policy and mechanics.

Help!
I've pretty much had it. Could you handle this AfD please? I really don't care about the outcome anymore, although it seems that it should be a clear delete or transwiki. However some people seem to disagree. Note that some users have very low editcounts(some only have 1 or 2 edits), and may not understand policy and/or have been told to "vote" keep or delete by some runescape forum. I'm just going to leave it alone, and work on the main page redesign. Thanks a lot,

Prodego talk  19:06, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr Swingy
Hi. I noticed that you had tagged the Mr Swingy article with the ; however, you did not leave a comment when you added this tag. Therefore, I have removed the prod tag and moved the page to AfD. I would invite you to comment on the page's AfD page. Thanks. James084 03:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Neoplorgismanteau
Fixed. The article is now at Neoplorgismanteau. Aecis Mr.Mojorisin' 15:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Uncle Jemima
Hello. I would appreciate it if you could take a look at my comments and review your vote here on the AfD for the above article. Thanks. Jtmichcock 02:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Flamarande
Hi, I am Flamarande and I want to protest against your tampering of the Userboxes of ASoIaF and I want to ask that you stop it. I don´t know if you deleted the other userboxes of that "series" but to be honest, I also suspect you of it. I know that a proposed policy about userboxes is being implememnted whithout restraint by over-eager users but I have to point out that it is still a "proposed" policy and not a "official" policy. Jimbo Walles the founder of Wikipedia is opposing "political" userboxes, and even he concedes that the matter is still being debated. I can also see that you yourself are member of many Wikicategories who are as worthy as WkiFans of a Song of Ice and Fire. I also protest the fact that you did it whitout announcing it, no warning signs appeared anywhere that I know off. If this unofficial "Userboxes burning campaign" continues to run amok I wil complain of it in the official channels. I would be much obliged by a reply. Thanks Flamarande 18:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no clue what you're talking about. All I did on that template was to remove an extra space from a link. BD2412  T 18:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it was a acidential deletion, it was a mistake you made five times. You deleted also "Category:WikiFans of A Song of Ice and Fire|PAGENAME". Someone deleted all the other userboxes of that series, without following the proper procedure and whitout giving any reasons and therefore I jumped to wrong conclusions. Sorry Flamarande 18:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I reiterate, I did nothing on Template:User ASoIaF other than to remove a single extra space from a link. As the article history and my deletion log both indicate, I've never deleted that template or the accompanying category, or modified it in any other way. Good like in finding the right editor to address this issue to. Here's a tip: go to Category:WikiFans of A Song of Ice and Fire, click on any redlink on that page, and click on the link to "view deleted edits". Cheers! BD2412  T 19:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, you showed me a "bug" in wikipedia. As I saw the history of the single userboxes it appeared that you did it (it was shown in yellow under the changes you made, now I know that it was bug of the system). I am sorry to have accused you (you being completly innocent) but at least I was honest and explained the problem. I am very sorry to have acused you wrongly, and I am completely convinced and sure of your innocence. Again, Sorry. Flamarande 19:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Accepted. Cheers! BD2412  T 19:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Starseed launcher
Starseed launcher you "prod"ded is now on a regular AfD. mikka (t) 17:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for watching my actions
I will be a lot more careful when deleting stuff out of the CFSD page, as opposed to deleting them directly from Special:newpages in the future, thanks for spotting my mistake. -- O bli (Talk) ? 17:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Good man - we all do some such thing early on. I know I sure did. BD2412  T

Message from Rejnal
Much thanks for pointing that out before it got deleted. I really had no idea. Will definitely try to be more careful next time. Thanks.--Rejnal 00:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks - happy editing! BD2412  T 03:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Cyclone dab cat?
Hiyas. You mentioned in Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_16 that you have asked to keep the debate open a bit longer to establish a clear consensus. Are you saying you would like me to put it in /unresolved? I'm trying to clear out the older days. FWIW, even as it sits I would close it as a keep so there's no worry that those hurricanes would get tossed into ambiguous human names or whatever was suggested. Let me know. Thanks! --Syrthiss 13:40, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * ok, /unresolved it. Thanks! --Syrthiss 15:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, its sat there for 2 days with only a slight change in position from Simpson. I'm tempted to close and keep it now, are you satisfied that no further insights are forthcoming? --Syrthiss 15:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's pretty clearly a "keep" now. Thanks. BD2412  T 15:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. --Syrthiss 16:16, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Tax honesty
I know, I know, I'm missing the fun, and I'm definitely gonna get in on it if I can (but who knows when at this point). Right now it's more hectic than normal for me, as tax season is heating up.

And here on Wikipedia, I'm working on a discussion on the article on Academic degrees. Several editors are arguing, on the Talk page, in favor of certain contentions in the article to the effect that despite its name, the J.D. degree "is not a doctoral level degree" and the J.D. somehow "does not confer the title of doctor." I and one other editor contend these statements don't belong in an encyclopedia article without some sourcing. I sense that the statements are both POV and not verifiable, whether true or not. The other editors are coming up with their own arguments (on the Talk page only, of course) for why they believe the statements are "true" and should remain in the article, but they haven't yet put any supporting citations in the article. This article and some of the related articles are, in my opinion, not in very good shape, with people arguing back and forth over whether this degree is better than that degree, and that degree is equal to this degree. A lot of it sounds to me like 13 year old boys arguing over -- well, whatever we argued about when we were 13. I had been purposely avoiding the articles on Juris doctor and Academic degrees, etc., for that reason. I just can't devote much time to it right now.

Anyway, is there a deadline for me to put my 2 cents in on the Tax honesty thing? I just can't deal with it tonight and tomorrow. Any thoughts? Famspear 03:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear BD2412: I put in my vote on the article this morning. Good grief, even assuming this article should stay, it needs major work. I'd like your opinion: Should I put tags in appropriate places in that article now, or is it better just to hang back and let the article sit "as is" while the voting is under way? I don't have a strong urge to deal with the article right now, as I'm pretty busy. Your thoughts? Yours, Famspear 15:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Regarding "Vivian Kellums" - no, I've never heard of her, and I've studied quite a few tax protester cases. A quick search of the Federal tax case law using the CCH search engine reveals nothing with the name "Vivian Kellums" since the year 1913. Could be an unreported decision somewhere of course, but nothing signficant. I googled the name and of course I find numerous references to her in tax protester web sites. Famspear 17:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strange - seems almost like one of those mythic figures... although she was interviewed on "Meet the Press" in 1948, so she existed and had some significance. Thanks for looking, tho. BD2412  T 17:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Ooops, I see it's spelled "Vivien Kellems." Yes, on CCH I pick up quite a bit with that spelling. Looks like early 1950s. Yeah, it might be fun. I'll try to read the cases later during the weekend and I'll let you know what's there. Yours, Famspear 17:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

list of minor biblical characters
hey BD, posting here since you're clearly logged on. before I take it to AfD, see this Articles for deletion/Adina (Biblical name) and tell me what you think? Would you have voted Keep on Adina? - the.crazy.russian τ ç ë  22:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I would have voted to merge it into List of minor Biblical figures, as I have just done. There is, to my thinking, a middle ground that such an article occupies, bringing under one heading a large amount of information that should be kept in the storehouse of human knowledge, but which is meaningless unless confined to one discreet location. BD2412  T 22:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * now, adding Adina to the list makes no sense. He's literally mentioned once in a list of names in the middle of 1 Chronicles (Divrei HaYamim), which contains thousands of names! Plus, there was no concensus to merge! - the.crazy.russian τ ç ë  22:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There doesn't need to be consensus to merge for that information to be added to the minor figures article - the AfD process measures consensus with respect to the existence of a separate article, not with respect to parts of a list or compilation. BD2412  T 22:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, your position is clear. I am, however, taking the list to AfD. Happy Passover - Chag Somayach. - the.crazy.russian τ ç ë  22:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I respect your position, but I disagree quite firmly. BD2412 T 22:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And you'll probably win the AfD just by having dropped your considerably influential name under that Strong Keep. :) I'll weep about it privately :) - the.crazy.russian τ ç ë  22:46, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, if the article is kept, I hope it is because it is appropriate for the encyclopedia, not because of my name! BD2412  T 22:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL... you know as well as anyone that AfD is often a herd phenomenon. But the sentiment is mutual. - the.crazy.russian τ ç ë  22:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Category talk:History of the United States/U.S. History map
I'm inclined to request speedy deletion of Category talk:History of the United States/U.S. History map as it is getting seriously out of synch with reality. Since you have been kindly doing some maintenance on it, I felt I should make sure you wouldn't mourn its passing. No rush at all, but please let me know when you get a chance. TIA, --Mwanner | Talk 23:15, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

wrongly deprodded
There's no such thing as "wrongly deprodded" - just means that someone wants a discussion on a point that is not a candidate for speedy deletion (as is any editor's right). Articles for deletion/King William V

hummm, when someone takes it upon themselves to deprod each and every prod, for what ever reason, then "wrongly deprodded" is correct. We have a system in place that could work, and save a lot of time spent on AFD noms, but some ppl seem to think they alone should be able to eliminate the Prod system from WP. San Saba 21:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I see plenty of articles still prodded.  BD2412  T 22:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination)
You are invited to vote at Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). The issue of the name has not been resolved and therefore people are now recruiting others to delete. Feel free to make your judgement known, thank you. Nomen Nescio 21:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Opening light/Kappa
Thanks for the merging suggestion on Opening light; frankly, I had a blind spot – that possibility didn't occur to me. Now, is there a RfC or something on those Kappa and Monicasdude guys (I assume you're "stalking" him? (I'm just reading the discussion on WP:AN/I. Boy, it's gonna be a hot topic... Duja 16:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I know of no RfC against either of them, but I will state at the outset that in areas other than those relating to deletion processes, Kappa is an outstanding editor and contributor. However, Kappa happens to have an unpopular penchant for pushing to keep any article that has any sliver of a chance for encyclopidic potential (although I have also seen him speedy any number of articles that were clearly gibberish or hoaxes). Although I disagree with his zeal, I do not begrudge him the absolute right to deprod any article and force a discussion as to its merits, nor his absolute right to argue for the retention of any article in AfD. BD2412  T 16:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I must say this attitude pissed me off, but I'll trust your opinion about Kappa, wait and see. FWIW, there's Requests for arbitration/Monicasdude. I'm not sure if they cooperate or just share some behavior patterns; probably the later. Regards, Duja 17:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I saw the RfAr, but have not interacted with Monicasdude enough to have an impression of him one way or the other. Thanks for letting me know, though. BD2412  T 17:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

TfD
Non-admins can still close anything as long as it's not delete. And, non-Bcrats can close RfA's as long as it is obviously oppose. -- GeorgeMoney T·C 23:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please see rule #3 of Deletion process. Yes, a non-admin can disclose a discussion, but "Non-administrators should not close discussions in which they have been involved".
 * then why did you say, "You have the admin qualities, I think, but the duties are tied to the position. Be patient and you'll get there", which means that you are implying that I need to be an admin and that I am trying to act like an admin. -- GeorgeMoney T·C 23:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Tssk, I was being complimentary. You took an admin action (closing a discussion in which you yourself had been involved) - but you did it correctly. In short, you did the wrong thing right - I'm not suggesting that you acted with malice or disregard for the rules, just that you unknowingly did something not permitted. However, perhaps you should be in a position to be so permitted. BD2412  T 00:08, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Administrator action review
Hello BDA, Tango recently questioned my deletion of the page Wikipedia:Trusted Users, which I speedy deleted since its only author, GeorgeMoney, voted delete on the page's MfD. However, half of the comments on the MfD voted to tag the page with a rejected tag. Please see Tango's message to me, as well as my response. Since I trust your judgement implicitly, I would like to ask your opinion on this. Thanks, Prodego  talk  00:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Answered on your talk, amigo. BD2412  T 01:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

What do you think?
Articles for deletion/The George Washington International Law Review. Thx. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 18:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. "Before the end of this AfD" means a couple of hours, so it'll probably be merge. Makes sense. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 18:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

notability inclusion essay
BD, would you mind commenting on something when you get a chance? (I know it may be a long while). I wrote up an essay expressing the oft-heard rebuttal in AfDs that inclusion of similar articles is not an indicator of notability. It's at WP:INCL and some relevant convo about extending it to general wikipedia jurisprudence is here. It's not a priority. Good luck with your case.--Kchase02 T 09:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Neat little essay - I'll get around to commenting on it. Cheers! BD2412  T 19:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Your message
Sorry for the long delay in replying (real life has been oveerwhelming, and I've been away from Wikipedia for a while). I've left a comment at the AfD page concerng neo-pantheism. I have to agree with those who think that it's essentially just an essay about pantheism with regard to more-or-less modern times rather than a distinct and encyclopædic subhect. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 10:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day
Happy Independence Day, BD. Incidentally, you may be interested to know List of songs in English labeled the worst ever is on AfD again (I seem to recall you voting on it in the past). PS. why do these news articles you always link to never have pictures of you? It's all about publicity :) CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the smorgasborg of info - I'm actually going to take a few wiki-days off, as busy as I am with work and family... and they never put my picture in the articles because I'm just a hapless peon who does all of the work and gets none of the glory. Cheers! bd2412  T 01:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:SaayaIrie.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SaayaIrie.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 14:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what the source for this image was - probably a blog or a forum. bd2412  T 16:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Miscellany for deletion
A portal created recently by - the Orkney Portal - has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion please contribute at: Thanks. --Mais oui! 08:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Miscellany for deletion

Keitholocism
You CSD'd this one. Mind closing the AFD? Articles_for_deletion/Keitholocism. (|-- UlT  i  MuS  04:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks - didn't know there was an AfD! bd2412  T 04:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

`

TFD for Template:Legally frivolous
The renamed template has been nominated for deletion. Whether or not you still think it useful, I thought you would like to know. Robert A.West (Talk) 06:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion
Looks like Sofa King may be kept in spite of yourself- still further proof that we don't own our articles ;) BTW, did you know your article on Monique Alexander was deleted a month ago?  It was restored today. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, it's good to see you editing after Florida has been in the news in an unpleasant way. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 18:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD Progressive Bloggers
You have edited the article Progressive Bloggers. This article is currently being considered for deletion under the wp:afd process. You may contribute to this discussion by commenting here. Thank you.Edivorce 23:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * My only edit to this article was to close the earlier vfd as no consensus. I have no opinion on the value of the article itself - if it's been slated for deletion through a new process, so be it. bd2412  T 03:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm nominating "Krka (disambig)" for deletion
Please note: I am nominating Krka (disambig) for deletion. You are shown in the history as having edited this page. If you wish to object, check the details by clicking the link above.

Regards, JohnI 18:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Authors whose works are in the public domain
I have nominated Category:Authors whose works are in the public domain, which you created, for deletion. You may want to comment at WP:CFD. Dr. Submillimeter 20:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As the debate is now over, I'm open to suggestions for a better way to organize the effort to alert users about works in the public domain. Cheers! bd2412  T 06:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Missing image Image:Gallen Kallela The Aino Triptych.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Gallen Kallela The Aino Triptych.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Gallen Kallela The Aino Triptych.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Gallen Kallela The Aino Triptych.jpg, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Gallen Kallela The Aino Triptych.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 18:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The image has been moved to commons, so I've gone ahead and deleted the entry here. Thanks for the notice! bd2412  T 19:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Al Gore III
I need not, I'm sure, to recite the several problems one ought to have found with JzG's redirection of the instant article, so I will simply express my appreciation for your properly reverting him. I imagine that someone might suggest your reversion to be of the sort disfavored by the (itself pernicious) Badlydrawnjeff arbitration decision, but I think it quite plain that that there exists a consensus amongst the community in this particular instance for a preservation in some form of the article and that the broader views of the community as expressed in policy are not inconsistent with that consensus. Good on ya, in any event! Cheers, Joe 22:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think I'd be hard-pressed to defend my action there - multiple AfD's have established consensus that such an article should exist, and the happenings of the past few days strengthen this sentiment. However, the content of the article will surely be subject to ongoing dispute, in which I will not partake. Cheers! bd2412  T 22:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Al Gore III AfD
Hah, as I was writing my little essay, you beat me to the punch on Billy, Roger, Neil. (Though I left Neil out as he wasn't distant enough.) Robert K S 17:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is in it's 5th AfD
List_of_songs_about_masturbation is up for it's fifth AfD. You participated in an earlier one. If you wish to participate again, please go to Articles_for_deletion/List_of_songs_about_masturbation_%285th_nomination%29 -- Lentower 03:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Phantasy (club)
A template has been added to the article Phantasy (club), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Accounting4Taste 16:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

El Toro Handrail, revisited
Hi, you commented on the last time El Toro Handrail was put up for deletion (here), and had some interesting things to say. I've put it up for deletion again (here), and I'd like you to review the article one more time. ALTON .ıl  06:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Samuel Lincoln
AFD is not a vote; sheer numbers do not always indicate the outcome. --Coredesat 21:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)