User:BuickCenturyDriver/Sept2009-April2011

Please don't edit this page: If you need to leave a message, please put it here.

Happy 's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pixelatique
A tag has been placed on Pixelatique requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Prezbo (talk) 08:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Pixelatique redirects to Filip Salindrija.  I created an AFD discussion for that article.  –BuickCenturyDriver 08:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Article deleted. (See: Articles for deletion/Filip Salindrija) –BuickCenturyDriver 22:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:IPsock
Template:IPsock has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. NW ( Talk ) 02:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A consensus was established to keep this template active. –BuickCenturyDriver 01:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Your edit
Could you please explain why you removed my comment ? --Folantin (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wrong rollback link was clicked but this is resolved. –BuickCenturyDriver 09:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:New Yankee Stadium.JPG
File:New Yankee Stadium.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:New Yankee Stadium.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

The Princess And The Frog
Hi BuickCenturyDriver - we already had an article on this film at The Princess and the Frog, to which I've converted The Princess And The Frog (NB capitalization) into a redirect. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PricelessMemories.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:PricelessMemories.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Greek Basketball's RFA
Hi there. Your neutral !vote at Requests for adminship/Wiki Greek Basketball was based on NOTNOW. Just to let you know that the editor in question has over 30000 edits since Feb 2008. Thought I would mention this in case you wanted to review your !vote. Thanks. Ged UK  13:18, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've posted a reponse, though the RFA is now closed. –BuickCenturyDriver 07:32, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:JimJoyce.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JimJoyce.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 09:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Quotes in articles
Please review Quotations and read the edit summary I used. An entire section devoted to quotes is strongly discouraged. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 05:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Wrong move
Hi there. Your move of the Victoria ezike was uncalled for. What prompted you to do that? The article is a candidate for A7-speedy deletion (unremarkable person), and is not to be moved into the article creator's user space. You might want to revert that move yourself. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:JasonBayMets2010.JPG
A tag has been placed on File:JasonBayMets2010.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the image can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the image. If the image has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. NatureBoyMD (talk) 22:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:JimJoyce.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:JimJoyce.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Belated RfA news
Thank you for your RfA nomination back in July 2009, which I was not then in a position to accept. I am writing to let you know that I am finally going to transclude my RfA, today. Your original nomination was too outdated to use any longer (I've saved a copy of it at User:SMcCandlish/RfA draft), because it took so long for me to be in a position to actually have the time to do admin duties. Using newer nominations is not meant as any kind of slight to you. :-) You are welcome to re-add one if you like, but there are already two, so that is probably overkill. Just wanted to let you know, since you'd gone out of your way last July. —  SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 19:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Closing RfAs
Requests for adminship/Osarius is clearly not a WP:NOTNOW case. I have undone your closure of it. Please do not close an RfA of an established user unless you gain their consent or pass WP:RFB. Thank you, NW ( Talk ) 03:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Additionally, if you do close an RfA (per WP:NOTNOW), it is generally considered polite to let the candidate know that you closed it, closed it early, and why you closed it. Thanks, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I did let them know, check my contributions. –BuickCenturyDriver 03:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't see that; if you check the timestamps I posted this at nearly the same time you notified. I'm glad you did that, thanks. But as NW said, closing expired adminship candidacies is generally left to a bureaucrat except in an obvious WP:NOTNOW case (which wouldn't be an expired case). But thanks for your initiative! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Final fantasy 7 is better than 6
Hello BuickCenturyDriver. I am just letting you know that I deleted Final fantasy 7 is better than 6, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. The Wordsmith Communicate 05:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Bow and Bromley (UK Parliament constituency)
The information deleted from the Bow and Bromley page is election boxes with no information on the results added. They should remain off the page until someone has the data to hand to add. 88.211.192.151 (talk) 13:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JasonBayMets2010.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:JasonBayMets2010.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tiebreaker
Template:Tiebreaker has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 02:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank spam!
TFOWR 21:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.  MBisanz  talk 01:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game GA
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC) Skier Dude ( talk  04:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:2010MLBPSMatchups
A tag has been placed on Template:2010MLBPSMatchups requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. Muboshgu (talk) 02:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2010MLBPSMatchups
Template:2010MLBPSMatchups has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Muboshgu (talk) 02:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Cool Hand Luke
Yes, that's right. The title character is one of my favorite film characters. Cool Hand Luke 07:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Your RfA
Probably best not to delete answers that you have already given, as some have already referred to the response in their votes. I have added the first answer to Q4 back in but struck it through. Things are not going well though, do you wish to withdraw gracefully for another time? --Stephen 04:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to recommend withdrawing—it'll only get worse. Someday, though... ǝɥʇ M0N0 04:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Beat you to the comment, it's done and even I had to oppose, but I was definitely not surpried you point out your concerns on my handling of images. This  response killed the whole RFA.  After you and MC10 opposed it was all over. –BuickCenturyDriver 04:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Re your question: it would have been a good idea to explain that when you mentioned it initially, or failing that as a response to my oppose. I don't know that it would have made a difference either way, though. Better luck next time, I suppose. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

 Hello BuickCenturyDriver, The Utahraptor has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Sorry about your failed RfA. If it means anything, if I had had time yesterday, I would've voted moral support. The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 12:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ever since I joined I has interest in it and began racking up edits to get a good count and the experiance necessary to make a good RFA. I never had the guts to express interest or nominate myself until last night.  I was expecting a little support based on the experiance and general knowledge on Wikipedia.  My poor knowledge about Cool Down Blocks earned almost every oppose.  Though I didn't expect to pass, I didn't expect to fail miserably either.  I hope for better results next time.  –BuickCenturyDriver 13:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Your request for an editor review
Hi there BuickCenturyDriver!. I've noticed that you've requested an editor review, located here. While it is not required, users that request a review are strongly encouraged to review other users, as this greatly helps with the backlog of requests there. Think of it as a mutual effort, you review someone and someone will review you. So if it's not too much to ask, please consider reviewing someone (the person before you would be fine - if he's already been reviewed, just look for someone that hasn't). I understand that you may not feel qualified or know how to review someone, so there are instructions in the Instructions for reviewers tab at the top of the page. As always, feel free to message me if you have any questions. Netalarm talk 06:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Martin muljana
This is not German. Why would you move it to the German Wikipedia? Corvus cornix talk  03:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It wasn't in English, so I transwikied it. –BuickCenturyDriver 03:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know, Malay? Indonesian?   Corvus cornix  talk  03:46, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halaman_Utama Corvus cornix  talk  03:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Mopar89 (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Straits dollar
Hi, i was editing the Straits dollar page without logging in (i forgot) and got a message from you saying I blanked the entire page out. I did not blank the entire page out but actually only removed the #British Military Administration and #Civil Administration sections and copied them into the history section of the Malayan dollar page where they should belong instead of the Straits dollar page, whose history only stretched to 1939. I believe I should be able to proceed with deleting those sections again. Cheers.Slleong (talk) 16:58, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for your support at my RfA last week. I'll do everything I can to live up to your expectations and if you ever need help from a janitor please feel free to drop me a line! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 22:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 13 December 2010 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding  to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove by adding to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.

-- The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 03:44, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really celebrate Christmas, but thanks anyway. –BuickCenturyDriver 09:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ProfessorHart'sLab.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:ProfessorHart'sLab.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 15:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clean Sadness (2nd nomination)


Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji 22:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Phillies&mdash;Pirates rivalry
I see that you had on your user page about the rivalry between the Philadelphia Phillies and the Pittsburgh Pirates. Do you think such an article is necessary, as it is a historical MLB rivalry? I'm just checking, as I want your input, so that I can create the article. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 02:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm trying to create the article, as the rivalry is gone, but we need to understand for a younger generation of players and fans of the Phillies and the Pirates, they need to know about the fierceness of this rivalry, as they don't know anything about it. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 17:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm trying to make clear the history of the rivalry and recent developments. It is also important to know that the Philadelphia&mdash;Pittsburgh rivalry is evident in other sports, as we see between the Philadelphia Flyers and the Pittsburgh Penguins in the National Hockey League. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 03:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Kate Plus 8
I have give three different references stating the next new episode scheduled to air on April 4th is the season 2 premiere, but for the life of me cannot get Baylix to understand that.

That's because TLC originally listed "Gosselins, Goblins & Ghouls" as the season 2 premire, even though there weren't any new episodes after that.

I've pointed out, with the references on this user's page, that TV Guide called "Gosselins, Goblins & Ghouls" a special and that both the Gosselin blog and TV by the Numbers calls this a "one hour premiere" episode. I even said it's possible that TLC made a mistake and "Gosselins, Goblins & Ghouls" was originally intended to be the season 2 premiere, but they changed their minds. That they never changed the episode summary. My latest comment, I said that these websites that mention the word "premiere" got their information, probably a press releae, from TLC, but I doubt that will do any good.

All this information and Baylix undoes the changes I made and apparently yours too. Until I can get a look at TLC's April schedule, it looks we'll still be reverting each other's edits. Once I see the network's schedule, then I can say "look" this is the premiere episode.

Thanks for trying to change it back to my edits. GiantTiger001 (talk) 05:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Please see GiantTiger001's talk page for my response to the above. Baylix (talk) 07:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

''Kate Plus 8 and the list of episodes. The other user has finally decided to give up trying to change it. GiantTiger001 (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

''' Here's the thing. You have not put any libable website. So right now we have no choice but to go off of TLC's page not a blogger page. There's only one page that is the one that we need to use. Blogger is a fan or someone wanting to sending the blogs around. TLC is saying that it's just a return on the show. It's not the matter that we been having this is issue with you (GiantTiger001) for a while now. First with the Duggars show and now this??--M42380 (talk) 09:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Neither
I don't believe there should be either category. If you take a look at WP:Overcategorization, specifically the sections on categorizing performers by performance and small categories, you'll see that the actors who were on the show shouldn't be in a category for it and that if the category is never likely to expand beyond a couple of articles it isn't necessary. The likelihood of there being any more Ghostwriter articles that would go into a category for the show is extremely low so in my opinion the category should be removed. The two articles are linked together through hyperlinks in the text of the articles themselves. Lafe Smith (talk) 22:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Game log reminder
Please remember to put the names of Red Sox pitchers in bold when editing their game log. Thank you. :)  Red Sox Fan274  (talk~contribs) 21:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Curious
Assuming you've registered User:BuickCenturyDriver 2, is there any reason you're playing with block notices there? It's not a blocked account, surely a better place to play would be User:BuickCenturyDriver/Notice tests or any other sandbox. The account appears to be a sock at the moment. I know it's not, but it doesn't look good! WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Because my target backlog is the unblock requests, so I created it to test the unblock requests. –BuickCenturyDriver 12:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It would probably help to put notice of that somewhere... it certainly made me sit up and notice, and almost request a checkuser. - Philippe  12:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * A very sensible thing to do, though that backlog isn't massive. I was just suggesting that putting a block notice and a test unblock on the page will give the wrong impression, and it would not look as bad if you did it on one of your own sandbox pages. Friendly advice, that's all :) @Philippe, there is a notice on the user page, just not on the user talk page  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry 'bout it. :)  –BuickCenturyDriver 12:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Stub templates
Just a minor note: stub templates go after the category links, not before, as per WP:FOOTERS. How you want to space it is up to you, though. Guoguo12 --Talk--  19:22, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
You have  new messages ( last change ). / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Your RFA
Hi. Can I make a friendly suggestion here? I would recommend that you withdraw rather than have it "run its course", because it is clear that it is not going to pass, and I feel that enough input has been given to give you an idea of what you need to work on in order to pass your next RFA (which I would recommend a wait of at least 6 months or so, while attending to the issues addressed).  ArcAngel    (talk) ) 12:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey BCD. I was just dropping by to make the same suggestion. I think, unfortunately, you should withdraw. Generally, RfAs get worse as time goes on, so once it looks like it's not going to pass withdrawing becomes the best option. Also, it's usually the first step you can take to win over opposers; it shows maturity, a willingness to accept defeat and criticism, and you can go out on the best possible note. I'm sorry the RfA took a bad turn and I hope to support you some time in the future. Best regards,  Swarm   X 16:54, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course it's up to you, but I would concur with the above. If you ever want to talk through your experiences or get further feedback, let me know and I'd be happy to help. I'm sure many of the others at RfA would say the same. However, if you leave it open, it probably will end up as a bit of pile on.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 17:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you're all right, I'm not as disappointed as you might think. I didn't expect it to pass but I was hoping for some endorsement, which I got.  With that, I'll withdraw and take on something else that might help gain more trust from others. –BuickCenturyDriver 03:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi BuickCenturyDriver. I'm sorry your RfA turned out the way it did, but I think you were wise to withdraw it. Hopefully the advice from the opposes will be helpful to you, but either way I hope you continue editing and don't take any of the comments too personally. Keep in touch. 28bytes (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I did take the "wrong answer" and pile-on ones a bit personally, keeping my composure during the process. I don't know exactly which questions I got wrong, but hopefully they'll come forward and tell me exactly what answers they were expecting.  Like I said, comparing this nomination (in which I did gain some endorsement to the first one which was a total washout), I think my persistance and effort will pay off some day, giving my patiance with others.  As they say, "Where there's a will, there's a way".  I haven't tasted it myself obviously, but I'm sure passing an RFA can be a very rewarding experiance to some editors.  –BuickCenturyDriver 04:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Persistence and patience are indeed very good qualities to have. If the people who thought you got the questions wrong aren't able to explain why to your satisfaction, stop by my talk page sometime, perhaps I can help. One thing you may want to keep in mind is that if you do decide to run again, consider getting a nominator. A good, experienced nominator can help point out areas of your editing you need to shore up before you face the masses at RfA. It's often difficult to see our own strengths and weaknesses objectively; a second pair of eyes "in your corner" would probably make things go more smoothly. 28bytes (talk) 04:16, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a few bits of free advice should you decide to run again in the future:
 * Make sure you have been fairly active for several months preceding the nomination
 * Although you were civil, you may have replied to too many opposes this gives some users a bad impression
 * Spell-check your comments. I noticed several errors. Also creates a bad impression
 * Take some condolence on the fact that several opposes are either partially or completely struck out, two users who were critical of you turned out to be sock/meat puppets and are now indef blocked, and you you did garner a few neutrals, usually a sign that those users do believe you can be trusted with adminship in the future. Look at it that way and it's not quite the pile-on it appears to be.
 * As I said, just some free advice to take or leave as you please. (incidentally, I drove a 1986 Buick Century up until about 1997 when it finally completely broke down on me...) Beeblebrox (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll definitely take the advice to heart. If there is anything I got with last nom beside the handful of support was a lot of people who I can turn to for advice.  I really do want the future third attempt to work out so hopefully I'll be more active during the Summer in order to avoid opposition based on lack of activity.  Thanks.  –BuickCenturyDriver 05:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't let the buggers get you down!
Most of them do little outside of Wikipedia and consequently don't realise how inappropriate it is to demand such stringent things from their volunteer administrators... then highly amusingly they get all confused about why the majority of admins (and then, consequently, editors, for the makeup of the former and latter feed into one another) are unemployed white male grad students :D

Egg Centric 20:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * While I don't fully endorse Egg centric's comment, I would agree that some of us who probably spend too much of our time here can be unreasonable in our expectations for activity levels. An average of just under 100 edits a month is low for a successful RFA candidate, though many fine and uncontentious admins are here for just a few hours per month, with clueful thoughtful edits that can be less than a hundred, a huggler in the same time might do a thousand - but would risk opposes for overreliance on automated tools. I think it a shame that your RFA didn't succeed this time, and unfortunate that you didn't get more specific feedback as to why. My first RFA failed for seven distinct reasons which actually made passing the second relatively easy. Assuming you don't plan to increase the time you spend on Wikipedia, I would suggest that you install wp:hotcat and see if you enjoy the occasional visit to Category:Uncategorized pages that would be a quick and easy way to get your edits per month above 100. I'd also suggest going to my preference, editing and tick "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary", you'll find that would resolve one concern that some raised and others like me decided on balance to overlook. One editor noted a lack of article talkpage comments, an easy way to resolve that would be to look at Category:Articles to be merged and comment on a few merger suggestions. Hope that helps.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  04:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Think of RFA is taking a road teat. Some pass on the first try, other need 2 or 3 tries.  I part of that comany.  That being said, I'm thinking of request the account creator permission and assist in creating new user accounts.  All that requires is knowning the template and fulfilling the requests.  If this is not for me, let me know.  –BuickCenturyDriver 04:55, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't comment on that area as I've never been active there. But shifting focus now and then keeps you fresh and widens your experience, so go for it. If you want any suggestions in the future for new things to try please pop by my talkpage, also I could always do with another collaborator at Database reports/Living people on EN wiki who are dead on other wikis, and its not an area I think appropriate to suggest to our younger brethren.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  05:36, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You actually don't need the account creator permission to get involved. You just need to request access to the tool (it's all at WP:ACC/G). You can figure out whether you like it or not and perhaps request the user right if you become active enough. ACC isn't really a sole focus though, most of the time there are no requests and when one comes in you have to beat everyone else to reserve the request, so I would recommend trying additional new things as well. On another note, I'm glad you're not upset about your RfA and that you intend to run again sometime. Regards,  Swarm   X 07:36, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Although I'm a regular !voter at RfA, I  didn't  comment  on  yours because there would have little I  could have done either way. I  could have !voted 'neutral', but even that  is seen by  many  as a 'weak oppose'.   I want you  know however, that I followed the whole process very closely.  I don't fully endorse Egg centric's comment above either, because the recent  reseach  we have done has shown  that on RfAs that  have a good chance of passing, there is generally  a very  good turnout  of admins and very  experienced users in  both  'support'  and 'oppose' sections (take this RfA for example where there was a lot of very  hard opposition - some of it justified, some not). What  one has to  be aware of, is that  being  a busy  editor will accumulate some enemies, even if all you  did was tag  their work or issue some correct  warnings,  or even just  having  a perfectly  reasonable but  different  opinion on  things. I don't  think 'pile-on'  was a real issue with  your RfA -  what  you  can do  is check  out  the users to  see who all  the voters were, their own experience, and whether they  are admins. A good analysis will  prepare you  for your next  run. WereSpielChecquers has provided some excellent suggestions about  where to work, and I  have another: read WP:NPP thoroughly, do  the patrolling  carefully to  avoid contentious tagging, and it  will quickly  broaden your experience in  some of the main  work that  admins have to do. It  will also rack up  your edit count quite quickly. Last  but  not  least, I'm  also  another user whom you  can always call  on  for help  and advice when you  are stuck. Take care, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems like you've cited your own RFA, KP.  Yes, I know only a few lucky editors get all support and no oppose, but for the rest of us it's almost inevitable that people will be skeptical whatever you say.  –BuickCenturyDriver 17:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes,I cited it. I passed, but  it  was a grueling  experience, and it  wasn't  clear until  the last  36 hours. This is what  experienced users can get  when they  run  for office, so  don't  be disappointed with  your own trial :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:41, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not disappointed at with the result. I'm pleased with the better results when you compare it to the first one which got all oppose and no support, very lopsided.
 * I initially intended to let my second nom stay for the week, but there were people saying it's best to withdraw, and when one of the supporters changed to oppose, I really saw no chance of it passing. If I could pinpoint what exactly tipped the scales, I might be able to find out how I could pass in the future.  For example, at this point I had a 6-2, (75% score) and was anticipating a good score at the end, even it if it didn't pass, but after the next two comments it tumbled out of contention.  Meanwhile RHM22's was at 60-70% or so when I withdrew, and now people are piling on the positives and is well on it's way to finishing with a good score. –BuickCenturyDriver 08:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * My feeling is that if any experienced editor suggests you should withdraw, you probably should, because that means a few more experienced editors are probably thinking the same thing but are reluctant to say so. And I can empathize with you, I had a similar early peak in my RfA which was ultimately unsuccessful. 28bytes (talk) 15:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Luiza Milk
Hi BCD. Just to  let  you  know that  I  have deleted and salted Luiza Milk as a G10 attack  page. If you see anything  like this again, don't  hesitate to  slap  a G10 on it, and it  will  raise a special  alert for the admins. Don't waste your time with  AfD on  them. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:11, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Survivor episode titles
Re your message: The titles of the future episodes are on the CBS schedule per the reference. Past episode titles are available on places like TV.com. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was wondering where those were coming from.  –BuickCenturyDriver 17:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Following through as a File Mover
Hi, would you be able to follow through and "clean up" after your file moves? In the case of File:JoanAllen.jpg, the rename media (or similar) template from the file needs to be removed after the move. Also, go to the original file location, click on "What links here" in the left column, and update the image link in all relevant articles (but not User pages, Talk pages, or User talk pages). In this case, the file link would be updated in the Joan Allen article. Finally, because File02.jpg is an implausible typo or misnomer, it needs to be tagged db-r3 for speedy deletion of a recently created redirect. I have done this for you, but in the future, please follow through. This is explained on the page that appears confirming the file move. Thank you. –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ <sub style="color:#5E1FFF;">galaxies  17:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

MyWikiBiz
Please update your userpage, the MyWikiBiz page was restored a long time ago! :) Dragquennom (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. –BuickCenturyDriver 22:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Userfying
Hello. When you userfy a page, as you did at User:Andyp571/Christopher Francis Hall, please look at it first. This one contained unsourced mention of real living persons, including a suspicion that a named real person was the mother of the supposed subject. WP:BLP does apply to user pages, however fantasy-based they may be. Thanks, Struway2 (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)