User:Merovingian/archive-25

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Carver299 (talk) 06:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Rollback
I do a lot of minor edits here and I do see vandalism from time to time. I am looking for rollback permission. Danke. :) --Teacherbrock (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Category discussion
Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I've nominated Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to grant rollback requests for renaming at Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 22; as the category's creator, your thoughts are welcome. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 05:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:John Campbell 5th Duke of Argyll.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:John Campbell 5th Duke of Argyll.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shizhao (talk) 01:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

(8846) 1990 RK7
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of (8846) 1990 RK7, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.calsky.com/observer/dataminor.cgi?page=8.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of self-referential books for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of self-referential books is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of self-referential books until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 02:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Cyberchase
Category:Cyberchase, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Minor planets
Hi Merovingian, I don't think every minor planet discovered in the Main Belt deserves its own Wikipedia article. Unless there's something specifically interesting about the object, or it is a significant (comparatively massive) body, then there's no reason to have an Encyclopaedia entry about it. I see that you've created literally hundreds of such pages recently, with no specific information on any object, other than mentioning who discovered it. It seems that they were created with some sort of script that just drops the name of the object into the appropriate fields and creates a link to JPL. I suggest that you pick out the most interesting few objects, include some more information on them in the articles, and delete the rest. You have to ask yourself, "Would anyone actually like to read this article, and why?" If an Astrophysicist wants to find information about Minor Planet 48475 (1991 UD2), for example, they can just go to the JPL Small-Body Database - there's no need for a Wikipedia article. -Thucydides411 (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Pain in da Ass for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pain in da Ass is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Pain in da Ass until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bgwhite (talk) 23:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Article creations
Hello, I see that you've created many articles lately. Is there a way of merging them under a single title such as "List of ....". I don't think (58166) 1990 OF3 and (58167) 1990 QM3 are very notable; there are hardly any results from Google and. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 08:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Please respond to this post. Sp33dyphil  "Ad astra" 09:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I have just tagged a bunch of these recently created minor planet articles. You said on Sp33dy's talk page that even you think they don't have general notability, so I'm puzzled why you are creating more article for them. I think the best alternative would be to merge the information into appropriate lists. Wikipedia cannot possibly be a catalog of every astronomical object discovered. I have sent other such objects to AfD before, and they were deleted. I will do the same with these, unless evidence of significant coverage is provided for them (or at the very least, the assertion of significant coverage in independent and reliable sources). Please reply on my talk page. Best, AstroCog (talk) 19:04, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Jubokko
Hi ^^

I was wondering why this page was deleted. Thinking the page never existed before, I was going to create this page until I saw the warning thing lol. ~ Tony64 (Talk) 15:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying. Yeah, a lot of webpages do tell basically the same thing (such as the obakemono project). Well, I havn't got much more webpages other than the first few links on google.


 * Shall I re-create the page with what I know, create one from my user page and let you have a quick look, or is it best not to even try? thanks ~ Tony64 (Talk) 15:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. thanks~ :) ~ Tony64 (Talk) 10:26, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Here's what I can do. Sorry it's been a while, I've been searching hard for reliable sources every now and then until I recently discovered that the Japanese Wikipedia has an article on Jubokko. I got a close friend to help me to translate various stuff. One or two parts may not be accurate, and most certantly at least three things need translating (with two not been translated properly). ~ Tony64 (Talk) 21:26, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll do that. Do you think someone will drob by and translate トンデモ本の世界U? ~ Tony64 (Talk) 07:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Greetings from another old-timer
Feel free to consider this as just a friendly wave of the hand, if you'd like. If not, tell me how you deal with the perennial problem of WikiBurnout? -- llywrch (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of (26118) 1991 TH


The article (26118) 1991 TH has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sign of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bulwersator (talk) 10:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of (26142) 1994 PL1


The article (26142) 1994 PL1 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sign of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bulwersator (talk) 10:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of (26152) 1994 UF


The article (26152) 1994 UF has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sign of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bulwersator (talk) 10:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of (26903) 1995 YT3


The article (26903) 1995 YT3 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sign of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bulwersator (talk) 10:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of (27723) 1990 QA


The article (27723) 1990 QA has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sign of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bulwersator (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello
I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Coghlan Island--There is a good number of citations and references.However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the article currently does not have appropriate sections and headings. Jipinghe (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
I removed the notability tags from your articles which were added. Are you grateful?♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Juneau articles
I came across Fritz Cove. The article mentions that it's along Douglas Island. It's been more than a few years since I've been to Juneau; a planned trip later this year (mostly to visit the Alaska State Library for further research) appears not to be happening. I do know that Fritz Cove Road and the Fritz Cove voting precinct are both on the mainland side, so I wasn't sure if that statement was correct. A quick glance at Google Maps proved inconclusive towards answering this.

Also, from looking at User:Merovingian/AK-Juneau, there's nothing about Juneau people. I didn't know whether or not that's within your interests. I'm working, mostly offline at this point, on Alaskan politician biography articles outside of the scope of currently popular media celebrities (e.g. Sarah Palin, Lisa Murkowski, etc.). At this point, my list of Juneau politicians includes Mildred Banfield, Jim Duncan, Bill Hudson, Mike Miller and Bill Ray, as well as various members of Cathy Muñoz's family. I even have a photo of Duncan in my Commons upload backlog. I was actually amazed at how friendly he was when I asked to take his photo, as I remember him from his legislative days as a rather extreme prick. I also remember Rosalee Walker as being quite the character, though I dunno if she would be considered "notable" by Wikipedia standards.RadioKAOS (talk) 05:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * First, on Fritz Cove, I was a bit confused, too. It took looking at the satellite image to clarify at least a few things, as from land, it looks like the northerly extent of Gastineau Channel.  I'd been up around North Douglas a few times, mostly to hike the Treadwell Ditch Trail down to Douglas, though I rode the bus through there a few times back when Capital Transit ran buses down the North Douglas Highway.  I guess I didn't notice from that end, and always associated the cove with the mainland.  As for the Juneau election articles, I noticed them before and wound up searching for what might have happened to them at one point.  If there is any real desire on anyone's part to update/fix the Juneau Assembly article, perhaps relevant portions of those articles can be utilized as an "Electoral history" section to that article.  It seems as though the CBJ website covers the subject well enough.  That combined with the lack of a pay wall on the Juneau Vampire site should be enough to suffice for sourcing.RadioKAOS (talk) 06:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, while glancing at something else, a more pressing issue comes to mind. Someone moved Thane, Alaska to Thane (Juneau) some months back. Others also moved articles for neighborhoods of Anchorage in similar fashion, regardless of whether these areas had previous distinct community identities (e.g. Chugiak, Eagle River, Girdwood, Spenard). Following this convention, I just moved Portage, Alaska to Portage (Anchorage) and West Juneau, Alaska to West Juneau. I noticed that there are a bunch of Juneau neighborhood articles which still have the ", Alaska" suffix on them. I could move these with no problem, but since it appears that you created most of these articles, I wanted to ask your opinion first. Also, I'm guessing that the convention for categorization should actually be "Category:Neighborhoods in XXX," rather than "Category:Populated places in XXX," which is currently the case with both Anchorage and Juneau.

Also, I have a copy of a book written by R. N. DeArmond in the 1980s about Southeast Alaska place names. If I can find where I put it, the book may come in useful for some of these articles. I seem to recall that his similar 1957 book was thrown onto the web, mainly because the printing plates for it were destroyed in the 1966 Sitka fire.RadioKAOS (talk) 07:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speaking of pay walls, I put a photo of the cover of that book on my Flickr photostream, but it's currently inaccessible because I haven't paid for the account yet.RadioKAOS (talk) 07:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Comment

 * I've never even seen The Matrix.

You may want to see it. The Merovingian was the bad guy. Viriditas (talk) 02:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Gastineau channel 17744.jpg
Had another question. Intuition/guesswork/faint recollection tells me that this view if of south of downtown Juneau?
 * 'Kay, thanks. I found another photo on Flickr facing the other direction.  Once I get around to the upload backlog of my own photos, I would like to do more digging around on Flickr.  Finally starting to find something other than "tourist photos."RadioKAOS (talk) 16:53, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Apologies for being a bit thick
Hi Ryan. and so on. Ooops - the "discovery circumstances" are of course there - my mistake! I've expanded a few of the JPL Small-Body Database Browser refs to indicate which particular item in the Db they are. Your thoughts about this? --Shirt58 (talk) 09:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Hey, anytime! I have my own (which usually involves over-marking-up new pages) hobby. I will look through all of your articles EVENTUALLY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwickwire (talk • contribs) 04:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Stop messing with my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.90.48.221 (talk) 00:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello
You must stop changing the William Gay page. /sp/ is not amused at your vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.90.48.221 (talk) 01:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Across Two Oceans
Hello, Merovingian, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, Across Two Oceans, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! Mattg82 (talk) 01:06, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Noodle-fighter-miki.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Noodle-fighter-miki.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:22, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Plea
Stop what you're doing! Read this: Talk:List_of_minor_planets consensus has not been what you say it has. Read this: Notability (astronomical objects). You are creating hundreds of thousands of articles and they will all be undone. Chrisrus (talk) 13:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply to the above, which proves that there was a consensus to redirect all such non-notable planets to a chart. Explain why you have taken it upon yourself to turn them all back into individual articles despite Notability (astronomical objects).  You have said this is consensus, but refer to nothing to prove it.  I say it is not and refer to the above.  Where is this consensus you speak of?  Show me where it is, I have shown you where the consensus is the opposite.  See here, also, Talk:List_of_minor_planets.  See?  I am right, please admit it and we can talk about returning them all to reverts, not articles that mock notablity guidelines. Chrisrus (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you claiming that you have consensus to do what you are doing? You admit, then, that you are acting without consensus?  Chrisrus (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Please answer this question: Do you have consensus to do what you are doing? Chrisrus (talk) 21:25, 19 November 2011 (UTC)