User:RenamedUser jaskldjslak901/Archive35

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #21
The Septeber issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 04:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football October 2008 Newsletter
The October 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Email
You've got mail. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey


J.delanoy gabs adds has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hey Secret!

I came to your userpage and saw that you had been gone for a while. I just want to say "Welcome back!"

You beat me to like three blocks in a row, and I hadn't seen you before. It's nice to see a new face around AIV. I want to thank you for being willing to help out. You are definitely correct that there are not enough active admins, and it will be my pleasure to work with you now that you have returned.

Have a good day!

-- J.delanoy gabs adds  20:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Home Audio
I totally rewrote the article and it was referenced; it was legitamate. Did you even read it? Why is it that every time a page is recreated, it is subsequently erased no matter how good it is? Daniel Christensen (talk) 16:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Take it to WP:DRV, that article still has the sourcing and neoglism concerns that made the article deleted in AFD. Secret account 17:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

You solved half the problem
Thank you for banning Baseball Card Guy, but I am afraid you have solved only half the problem. Libro0 is the other side of the problem. He has a pattern of incivil behavior towards others including myself and a habit of wasting the community's time over petty issues such as this. I have tried to bring this to light, especially his attacks, often done in a passive aggressive manner, towards me to light several times, but they fall on deaf ears, , , ,. Here are some examples of his false allegations including the first and the second in a series of false sockpuppet alegations,And this exchange where he eventually issues me an ultimatium -. There is more, but listing everything is too much work. I didn't sign up for this. I spend most of my time here checking in on him to make sure he hasn't thrown another false allegation against me. I have suggested banning both him and Baseball Card Guy to save the community a lot of headache. You have solved half the problem and I respectfully request you ban Libro0 as well. His pattern of attacks is clear as well as his wasting of the community's time. He is a problem that needs to be solved! Your Radio Enemy (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Request for undeletion
Hi! I saw your notice at the top of the page but I thought that I'd try asking you before going elsewhere. About a year and a half ago you deleted Adventures in Blackmoor because of WP:CSD A7, but I don't think that the article actually meant that criterion, because it was about a book. Since the article was part of a series of articles on similar topics, I'm asking you to restore it because it might be useful for WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons, and it would help complete the series. Thank you for your time. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I saw this come up, restored and userfied it Drilnoth. so ✅ Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yea it was deleted by WP:PROD for a reason of only basic stats, not A7, yea undeleted by Casliber so no worries. Secret account 12:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Libro0 is the fix in?
Have you taken any action against Libro0? As I have said before he is a problem user who has attacked me and others. Apparently if you disagree with him he will brand you as a sockpuppet. He has wasted enough of the community's time with his rabbit holes and needs to be dealt with. Is there some sort of fix in? Every time I have attempted to bring this problem to light it gets swept under the rug. To me there may be the appearance of impropriety here.Your Radio Enemy (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Libro0 yes he edit warred, but he never created socks, or attacked other editors with personal attacks, or so on. I'm not in his side but it seems like you are harrassing him too much. I suspect you are Baseball Card Guy and just filed a RFCHU against you. You pose yourself to be neutral in this case, but in reality you are either a sock or a meatpuppet of Baseball Card Guy attacking Libro0. Your edit interests are way too similar. I'm not an idiot. Secret account 16:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I was neutral in this case and you are just as bad as Libro0. It was proven that Baseball Card Guy intentionally made edits on articles that I edited to make it appear there was something going on. Libro0 has some ownership issues with the articles and has engaged in all sorts of bad behavior. I am just calling him on that and providing a needed counterpoint to someone who is running rampant and violating policy as well as wasting people's time. If Libro0 was simply civil to begin with, all of this mess wouldn't have happened. I welcome any and all investigation, which will yet again prove me innocent of these false and absurd accusations. This sort of thing has made me decide not to donate to Wikipedia, since there apparently is more like the wild west than any civilized forum for discussion. Also if I was a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of Baseball Card Guy, why would I call for his banishment? Your Radio Enemy (talk) 17:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you going to answer me or not? Your Radio Enemy (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Lets wait for the result of the checkuser, by the way I seen cases of users calling for the block of their own sock, if you are in fact a innocent victim, then I'll apologize and just ignore Libro0. Secret account 19:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

You know what, I have had it with you and all the other assholes here. It is a waste of time. In fact from now on I will tell everyone I know of all the negative experiences here. You can all go to hell. Your Radio Enemy (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No personal attacks isn't the way to do stuff, again lets wait for the checkuser and avoid Libro0 Secret account 19:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have time, there are three new (very obvious) socks of User:Baseball Card Guy at Suspected sock puppets/Baseball Card Guy (3rd) --Apoc2400 (talk) 12:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Blocked, page protected. Secret account 14:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

aubrey hawkins
Hawkins was notable because he was killed by the Texas 7, who became a group of wanted men nationwide. I'm turning it into a redirect. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Used your name ...
... well, not exactly your name, but more like you sentiment here. IMHO, this drama factory needs to end and finishing the CU is one of the best ways to make it stop. --Kralizec! (talk) 23:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Gogoyoko
Hi, you have understandably protected the page Gogoyoko from being edited/created. But after some talk with the creator, he completed a draft of the article in his subpage and to me, it looks much better than what he started with. I was wondering if could have a quick glance at the article and if possible, reconsider the protection on the page so it may be posted on Wikipedia. Thankyou! Dengero (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Any news on this?

I've used articles on other similar sites ([Sellaband] for example) as reference for writing this piece, where reference to the company statements/info on their own websites is the common thing. I've also browsed through other company sites CCP Games is one example and it seems the company website and newsletters are in many cases the main source for information.

Gogoyoko is new site, so not much has been written about it. Except in the Icelandic press. I've Googled it, and you can find some blogs and news on the creature. But the most reliable source seems to be its own website, and I write in my article "according to its website", "the company claims..." etc. to make sure the reader knows where the information is coming from.

Can the article be published? Or edited (shortened, what bits would need to go?) to include more basic info - so its at least up there, for future editing and additions from readers?

Is there any sources that isn't from Gogoyoko or sponsors, see our guidelines on Reliable sourcing. Secret account 14:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

'''Well... ''' Same as with many other company sites or Sellaband and other internet outlets, the main source is the company website. But apart from many other aticles, this one includes bits like "according to company website" etc. to make sure that the reader knows where info is coming from. No sponsors or partners have been put in as sources at the best of my knowledge. But I'll have a closer look at this. Try to find other sources and make it more solid.

Thanks for your help!

best,

(Randver1 (talk) 00:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC))

Misleading ?? Article Linking

 * Hi - please review Zoho_Office_Suite - They make edits that disguise themselves as having separate articles (they link to their headings using # heading instead of linking directly to their article). It's kinda misleading for readers, articles that focus on a certain subject contain links to an article's subheading (which contains minimal content).  The link is crafted in a manner that misleads readers to think the link will focus on on subject.  Kinda spammy.  Also, their article is a weak for references (most links are to their own site or blogs), the article is written as an advertisement. If such practices are acceptable no reply is necessary. - Cheers - DustyRain (talk) 21:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom questions
Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're interviewing all ArbCom candidates for an article this week, and your response is requested.


 * 1) What positions do you hold (adminship, mediation, etc.), on this or other wikis?
 * 2) Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?
 * 3) Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?
 * 4) How do you feel the Arbitration Committee has handled cases and other situations over the last year?  Can you provide an examples of situations where you feel the Committee handled a situation exceptionally well, and why?  Any you feel they handled poorly, and why?
 * 5) What is your opinion on confidentiality?  If evidence is submitted privately to the Committee, would you share it with other parties in the case?  Would you make a decision based on confidential information without making it public?
 * 6) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) How do you feel the Arbitration Committee has handled cases and other situations over the last year?  Can you provide an examples of situations where you feel the Committee handled a situation exceptionally well, and why?  Any you feel they handled poorly, and why?
 * 2) What is your opinion on confidentiality?  If evidence is submitted privately to the Committee, would you share it with other parties in the case?  Would you make a decision based on confidential information without making it public?
 * 3) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) Why do you think users should vote for you?

Please respond on my talk page. We'll probably go to press on Tuesday, but late responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 10:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Actions on Candidate statements page
To put it politely as I can muster, what the hell are you doing? You're a standing candidate, you should'nt go reverting other people's edits on ACE pages!--Tznkai (talk) 16:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Look at the edit first, he malformed his candinatcy. I told him to fix it on his talk page. Thanks Secret account 16:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Any number of other editors can do that sort of busy work. None of them are standing candidates.--Tznkai (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea I agree, was trying to help as neutral as possible, was a officer last election, got carried away this election. Secret account 17:16, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. --Tznkai (talk) 17:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Your positions on candidates
There's no problem with such pages. A whole series of them already exists. See, e.g., User:Lar/ArbComm2008. Regards, Cool Hand Luke 17:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Glad to meet you! (Especially considering you used to be WP:WPTC member Jaranda.) I was just curious; under the account Secret, do you at all plan on re-joining WPTC? --Dylan620 ( Home •  yadda yadda yadda  •  Ooooohh! ) 21:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

No Secret account 19:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Info
FYI - I never had an arbcom case against me. You may want to update your data with the Jack Merridew case currently on arbcom review. Thanks. -- Cat chi? 16:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

small fix
I fixed a broken link on your arbcom page. Sorry for editing your page, I hope it's not a problem --Enric Naval (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom vote
Hi there! I noticed in your oppose you said you'd describe your voter rationale in your voter guide. I've been eager to read it, but as of yet it still hasn't been posted. Do you have an idea of when it will be posted? Thanks, and happy editing! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 02:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Yea I should post it today, I finished it yesterday but my labtop battery died off right when I was about to save it. Secret account 12:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football December 2008 Newsletter
The December 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Gogo
Can you please re-check this article;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Randver1/Gogoyoko

Should meet all standards by now.

More sources have been linked to the article. Some claims / statements coming from the company itself are, understandably, linked to the company's official website. Otherwise the company website is not used as source for information. Is there anything that might be in need of improvement (or should be removed) to make the article available?

best,

(Randver1 (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC))

From Dengero:

''I am fine with your article. It's just that you need to convince Secret to unfreeze the page. Best of luck. Dengero (talk) 02:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randver1 (talk • contribs)

I unprotected it, I still have some concerns about sourcing, don't be surpriced if the article meets AFD, but it's not speedyable now. Secret account 12:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I will send it to a few people before I post it to see if I can improve the sourcing further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randver1 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Notabilty (political parties)
I feel a little sad to see my proposed policy rejected with a big red 'x' like that, it seems to sudden and final. However I do accept that there has been almost no consensus, despit my best efforts. I am worried that you suggest WP:GROUPS covers it; political parties are a specific problem (as found in some of the discussion), but in the absence of anything else, I'll see if there's any chance to bring what has been agreed to GROUP. Cheers doktorb wordsdeeds 18:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your page
In regard to User:Secret/Attract More Editors I have always thought we should be doing our best to make wikipedia better as each day goes on and i dont know, i just get the feeling that the wiki has become less populated than say from last yr. Just a feeling i get. You see many respected editors leave for one reason or another, and of course new ones come along but it just feels different. The lowest admin successful rate in September for such a long time made everyone think long and hard and i thank you for creating such a page. On this issue, this year will be the lowest for successful admin candidates since 2004 and its down massively compared to 05-07. Maybe something should be created where everyone can have their say on the faults of wikipedia and what we can do to make it better, in terms for the editors.

I think along the lines of this topic is looking at the history of active users on wikipedia through Special:Statistics (registered users with at least one edit or logged action in the past 30 days). I have asked slakr to try and give me some data on the previous figures for this stat and it would be interesting to see. Best  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 13:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Userfy Danny Choo
There is no question in my mind that a person as well known and notable as Danny Choo will eventually have an article that survives. Please userfy the page for me so that we can continue to work on it. DOSGuy (talk) 20:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, I wonder if you could explain why the page was indefinitely protected from creation below sysop under WP:SALT. It has only been re-created twice.

Following the original deletion, myself and others added a couple of sections to it, most notably three television appearances. I consulted my Admin coach, Revolving Bugbear, and he advised that it would not be a candidate for speedy deletion if it was substantially different. Following that consultation, on his advice, I re-created the article. It was speedy deleted by Stifle, so I wrote to him about the changes that had occurred, and how the television reports, such as a CNN report specifically about him, demonstrated notability. He gave me his blessing to re-create the article.

Following re-creation, it was again speedy deleted by Gwen Gale, who undeleted it after I spoke to her about it and she decided that speedy deletion had been unwarranted, also removing the G4 criteria and forcing a proper AfD discussion to occur.

Without that information, the article may look like more of a yo-yo than it really is. Both of the admins who speedy deleted acknowledged that speedy deletion was unwarranted, and one of them gave me his blessing to restore the article, while the other undeleted it for me. Since the article has only ever been re-created with the blessing of an admin, or by an admin, there doesn't seem to be cause for protection. It has neither been repetitively nor abusively re-created. I, furthermore, pledge that I will not create the article again except on the advice of an admin. I received that advice on the only occasion that the article has been re-created, and I will always get an admin's blessing before re-creating any deleted article. DOSGuy (talk) 17:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * At your convenience, of course. DOSGuy (talk) 20:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/SoundGate
Hello Secret, I think you may have clicked the wrong button here when you deleted SoundGate. If you review the AFD Articles for deletion/SoundGate you may have missed the last comment by the nominating Editor, for deletion: “…I support Shoessss's suggestion to merge/redirect and withdraw my nomination for deletion“. Most likely, just an oversight. However, if I am mistaken, and you feel your decision was correct, I will  post to Deletion review. Thanks for your consideration. ShoesssS Talk 20:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes - No - Maybe - need a little more time? ShoesssS Talk 17:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. ShoesssS Talk 01:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Pomeroy and Newark Railroad
I'm wondering why you deleted this - it seems to have been a reasonable stub. --NE2 01:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello? --NE2 06:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Restored, it was almost two years ago I deleted it. Secret account 16:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll clean it up now. --NE2 01:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Excellent closure at Mumbai victims
I just want to congratulate you on an excellent closure. Closure is such a helpful part of discussion, especially when done well. I think your closure was exemplary because: Perhaps this was a difficult closure, perhaps it wasn't so hard. Whatever the case, you did it just right. Congrats. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * you were willing to reflect the reality that there was no consensus (better closure w/out consensus than discussion rambling on forever);
 * you accurately reflected the rationale (not merely the opinion) of each side—recentism v. misunderstanding of policy;
 * you were willing to assess both sides as essentially presenting invalid arguments for their recommendation; and
 * you recommended a course of action that progressed things in a way that both sides could see has wisdom.

Cleaning up proposals
Hi. Thanks for cleaning out some of the lingering notability proposals. I have tried to do that from time to time, but have been burned-out and busy a bit lately. Please keep me in mind if you need help with this. Cheers! --Kevin Murray (talk) 15:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Rubber-Band_Man_(Static_Shock) and Articles_for_deletion/Mainframe_(C.O.P.S.)
Hello! Please reconsider these closes. There was clearly no consensus to delete either, maybe to merge and redirect without deleting the edit history, but not enough for outright deletion. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Nope, consensus isn't a simple vote count, the keeps didn't give perfectly good reason for keeping this article. The sources issue weren't met. See my reasoning, in the Mainframe AFD, it's valid for both. I agree that AFD isn't the place for arguing if you agree or disagree with fiction articles though, and the nominations of these articles should stop. Secret account 20:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Given that so many editors did not support deletion, would you be opposed to a redirect with undeletion of the edit history, even if a protected redirect as a compromise? Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I restored Rubber-Band Man as I noticed it was merged before the AFD, and I need to restore it for the GFDL, I redirected and protect it though. The other one has a better consensus, if you could find a redirect for it, do so. Secret account 20:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the appropriate place would be C.O.P.S._(animated_TV_series). If undeleted, I would be willing to merge any relevant information to that section and expand it or to a list of characters and merge and then redirect all those articles to that list.  Regarding the merges before nominations, I have notice the nominator has done that multiple times now without indicating where thins are being merged to and from and have started a discussion at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents as I am not sure how to persuade him to indicate where the merges as from since he is doing so even after an admin cautioned him.  Sincerley, --A NobodyMy talk 20:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I also support redirection and edit-history-undeletion as a compromise. I also think that if you believe that "the nominations of these articles should stop", then I'm not sure how it helps to close them as delete. If merge and redirect is a plausible option, it should always be preferred over outright deletion. And it should be emphasized that articles that can be merged and redirected should be discussed at relevant talk pages rather than AfD. Saying that the AfDs should stop, but deleting the badly nominated articles anyway, sends a mixed message. DHowell (talk) 04:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Blagojevich at ITN
Hello, Secret. You might want to say a few words at WP:ITN/C regarding this post of yours at ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 18:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

ITN
Hi there! Just a small note; remember that news at ITN should be internationally notable. The exploits of corrupt U.S. senators aren't necessarily important for anyone outside the U.S. For borderline news-worthy stuff like this I recommend passing by the suggestions page. Thanks for contributing though! Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :D  18:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring?
Hi

I note you became involved in an edit war on History of the British Isles and then protected your version. Are you aware that this is an abuse of Administrative powers? Please explain your actions or I will be forced to report you. Sarah777 (talk) 00:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I was led to these articles via WP:AN/I. What I found was a brewing edit war and I reverted to the version before the edit war and protected it. Also the other user was violating policy because it was cut and paste moves thus a violation of WP:GFDL. Let consensus form in talk. I don't edit these topics anyways. Secret account 12:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK. Sounds reasonable. Sarah777 (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Brownmark Films
Just messaging to congratulate you on a good closing statement on the "Brownmark Films" AFD. I was a "keeper", but I felt very contented after reading your in-depth summary. Regards, Ryan 4314   (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Ross Newell
I wonder if you could have another look at this. The deletes were by editors under the impression there was no verifiable information. When I provided this to show that Ross was credited on Read My Lips (album), Leavesleeves, who had !voted delete, agreed it would be good to include minimal info on the album page, and there was another redirect !vote. The earlier deletes simply did not return to comment on the new information, and what they had said earlier was based on false information. I suggest therefore that the weight of argument at the end was for a redirect to the album, or at least there was merit to reopen to continue the discussion.  Ty  05:39, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

It got recreated, but can't redelete it (different material), even though the sourcing isn't independent. If you want to do a merge and redirect it that's ok with me. Secret account 12:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Now merged with a redirect.  Ty  06:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

7 Wonders of the Western Pacific Railroad World
While this is a local claim, this does give a good framework and heading for folks railfanning the Feather River Canyon. Since railfanning seems to be an area Wikipedia is trying to expand, why delete this page? It's really interesting. And, this is from a railfan, not anyone in the local area or involved with the chamber of commerce or the like. MikeVdP (talk) 22:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Spurs-Suns rivalry
Please see the changes I made at Spurs-Suns rivalry and see if it now meets your approval. I added several sources about the rivalry, including a new section on how it spilled over into the coach's career as the Olympics coach. Sources include two by Associated Press writers and the San Diego Union-Tribune. I also added the latest chapter with sources from the past year's playoffs when the Spurs' use of the Hack-a-Shaq strategy reached a new level.-- 2008 Olym pian chit chat 04:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Userfy Request
Hi you deleted my article on trinity morgana which has been up for years without dispute and without giving me the opportunity to verify it I would greatly appreciate if you userfy it back to me so i can make the necessary additions required for re-submission Thanks kindly Billmathies (talk) 05:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Kmweber ban proposal
Per your comment in voting oppose, now that the elections are over I've started a new ban discussion. Daniel Case (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Curse of Fred Merkle
What's your opinion of this?  Enigma  message 06:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Thunderbird extensions was deleted by you
You deleted the List of Thunderbird extensions page without giving a reason. A List of Firefox extensions page exists. Why delete the Thunderbird page? (and why delete any page without giving a reason in the deletion log?) &mdash;TedPavlic | (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I did give a reason for deleting the article, I mentioned it was a A1. The article consisted of an external link and a spam link. Secret account 18:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Week long blocking

 * Why was I blocked? What copyright or law did I violate? Those pictures of the Panamera, 911 and Cayman are factory produced images intended for promotion, distribution and fair use by the public (most especially in instances where it is used for educational reasons, such as here in Wikipedia). All this means, I violated no copyright laws and those images were used legally.

Red marquis (talk) 09:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

You tagged it as public domain, it's not public domain. Secret account 20:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD revisit
Articles for deletion/Schutzwald seems to favor a redirect, could you see if that may be an appropriate outcome here? -- Banj e b oi  01:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Notifications about Page Unlocks
There is currently a discussion going on at WP:RFPP about whether to unprotect several articles. As the protecting administrator of History of the British Isles, you are invited to come join the discussion. NuclearWarfare  contact me My work 02:14, 26 December 2008 (UTC)