User:RenamedUser jaskldjslak901/Archive48

1979 Imperial Valley earthquake assessment
Hello,

Thanks for volunteering to do the review for this article. It's my first nomination for good article status. I think we may have had a missed approach on getting this thing going. I saw you'd posted to the GA review page and chimed in the following day to say hello. I would like to move ahead with the review if you're willing. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000 

Deletion review for Parikipandla Narahari
I have asked for a deletion review of Parikipandla Narahari. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 06:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Pran is ready to repost
Hi. I figured out who tagged the ITN Pran article and why. I rewrote the additions to address the copyvio concern. It is ready to repost. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

AfD closed as delete
Articles for deletion/Rotaract Club of University of Moratuwa

I don't think that this was a correct closing. The topic is already mentioned in the encyclopedia, which means that a failure of notability is not an argument for deletion. Further, there were 21 unrefuted sources in the article, and the only editor to review the sources found apparent reporting in depth in multiple reliable newspaper sources. No content policy was cited by any editor that would be a reason for deletion under WP:Deletion policy. Even by counting of raw !votes, there were more opposed to deletion than in favor. What does that leave that could render a delete result? Unscintillating (talk) 02:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Notability is a reason for deletion (despite some claims to the contrary) and I saw no evidence of any merge of the club article to another page (if that's the case I would have closed it as merge and redirect). While the webhost would have been faulty, the keep commentators (outside the weak one which I presume is the editor you are talking about, and I don't think he went though every source) didn't give any policy or guideline based reason to keep the page on Wikipedia. Consensus was rather clear on this one. Secret account 04:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've requested a deletion review at Deletion review. Unscintillating (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kenny Easley
The article Kenny Easley you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Kenny Easley for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 20:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Ka (rapper)
Hi there. Was this page even nominated for deletion? It's on my watchlist and I didn't notice if so. The subject is certainly notable, as a cursory google would demonstrate. I think it was a mistake to delete it. -- Wetdogmeat (talk) 02:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

You have any evidence that he meets WP:MUSIC or WP:GNG? I saw no evidence of notability nor it bothered to claim any, the blue linked groups the article claimed he was linked to something completely unreleated. I checked Google and I saw some underground hip hop websites talking about him, but that's not sufficient. Secret account 02:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * A few sources from the first two pages of a search for "ka rapper":, , , , , , , . -- Wetdogmeat (talk) 02:51, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw the XXL and BET sources and restored it, though others you listed aren't really acceptable like factmag. Thanks Secret account 02:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Peer review/Vazgen Sargsyan/archive1
I will greatly appreciate your review! -- Ե րևանցի talk  04:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Please help
I was watching the page ACE College of Engineering which you deleted yesterday. I had provided enough evidences as per the earlier comments by moderators. The moderators themselves reply affirmatively. What should I do to get the page back.

Afzal (talk) 11:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013
posted by Northamerica1000(talk) 13:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Roy Riegels/GA1
Secret, it's been over three weeks since you opened this review with the plan of reviewing it the next day. Are you planning to do the review soon, or should it be put back into the GA reviewing pool? I'm happy either way, but this is overdue for some sort of action. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: another delayed GA review is Talk:1979 Imperial Valley earthquake/GA1. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Kenny Easley/GA1
Looks like you forgot to transclude this. If you don't want to address the comments within a few days, let me know. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw the review, I did some work to it, and I should finish working on it by this Friday. Been very busy lately, sorry about that. Secret account 19:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Can you either update the GA page or let me know you're not pursuing this GAN please? Many thanks.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's currently leads overall, while Pool B's  is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today,, with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by, and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by, and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Fai zan  06:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sir! Can I expect 2 minutes of yours? An event related to New Pakistan president was posted there at ITN. but still, the nominator and updater are looking for getting the glorious congratulations. Can assign credits please? The article's talk was updated with the notification of being listed at ITN, but we never got congratulations. Please, just 2 minutes.  Fai  zan  16:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Secret. Fai  zan  16:58, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

User_talk:Wizardman
Secret, IIRC you never crossed paths with me, but in any case I appreciate your support. May the Force be with you ☺ Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Scott Niedermayer/GA1
Thanks for the review! I believe I have addressed your concerns. Cheers! Resolute 21:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of David Clyde
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article David Clyde you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 10:56, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of David Clyde
The article David Clyde you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:David Clyde for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 13:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Georgian mafiosi
" Rather close one policy wise, but considering this is a purely BLP list of simply red links, and we need to be cautious about those things, something not really mentioned by the keep commentators."

My vote was: "Keep but purge, given the weight of the "mafiosi" attribute in my view we should be very zelous on the inclusion of every name, and a single source could not be enough for inclusion. I suggest keeping for now just the bluelinks and eventually discuss the inclusion of redlinks supported by multiple sources in the talk page". Then User: My very best wishes wrote "Lists, especially of potentially contentious content, should not include red links to non-existing pages, and especially about living people. If this page is kept, prepare that someone might remove all red-linked objects/subjects of the list." I agree that a list of "mafiosi" wholly made of redlinks was unsustainable, but in my view removing red links was an easy step to remove the BLP violations and comply WP:NLIST and WP:Source list without TNT. Cavarrone 05:34, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Admin wheel warring. Thank you.  LGA talk  edits   09:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw, it got completely out of hand, I just endorsed the closing of the thread before it becomes a bloodbath. Tone did the right thing, hell I probably would have unpost it again if I wasn't sleeping. Secret account 16:38, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jack Warhop
Alex ShihTalk 16:02, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Taylor Stockemer
What's your purpose or reasoning for this? What are the issues you have with this article in particular? Pmaster12 (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

See my rationale, he does not meet WP:ATHLETE as he never suited up for an NFL game and was released a month after he was signed as an undrafted free agent. We do not create articles of every player who signed for an NFL team, unless they are notable for another reason (like a remarkable college career, having significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject, not passing mentions. If he gets hooked to a roster then it could be recreated, also your ignorance of warnings several people gave you in your talk page and in the administrators noticeboard indicate that you either you can't comprehend our policies or a complete disregard of the community. If you keep creating those articles without consensus, you will be blocked by another administrator, or a topic ban on creating anything related to WP:BLP. Secret account 20:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Block evading user
Hello, just wanted to let you know that, whom you recently indeffed for making legal threats, is socking as an IP. Cheers, Athenean (talk) 18:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1979 Imperial Valley earthquake/GA1
Secret, the nominator is looking for your input on the status of the review, which you started a while ago. Please stop by as soon as possible. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of David Clyde
The article David Clyde you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:David Clyde for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 16:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment?
Hi. I'm looking for an experienced editor to provide an impartial view at a POV dispute, particularly one that doesn't continuously make reference to their own personal "knowledge" of the topic. I'm close to losing my composure (probably have already) at a discussion here with two editors who regularly contribute to the article in question and have been contesting what I feel are my improvements to the article. If it's not too much of a bother, would you care to chime in? If not, no need to respond. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 22:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Posting on a retired page
The user Ashbeckjonathan is now WisconsinBoyCleveleandRocks22884; do not post messages on that talk page; I will remove the message. If you want to post messages, do it on my new talk page. Thank you. WisconsinBoyClevelandRocks228844 (talk) 21:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Alison Rosen undeletion request
Alison Rosen's page was deleted because she was not "notable enough". That was several years ago. Now she is the co-host of the Adam Carolla Show, the world's most downloaded podcast according to Guinness. She also hosts here own podcast, Alison Rosen Is Your New Best Friend, currently ranked in the top 200 podcasts according to iTunes. I believe she is now notable enough. Listn2BlkSabth (talk) 02:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Alison Rosen
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alison Rosen. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Listn2BlkSabth (talk)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Buildings in Champaign
I would be interested in having the content of the recently deleted List of the tallest buildings in Champaign, Illinois merged and redirected to Champaign, Illinois. Zonafan39 (talk) 04:31, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

TOPYX Social LMS Deletion
Hi there. I'm wondering if you will be able to provide me information about why you deleted TOPYX social LMS wikipedia page? I will be grateful for your feedback on this page deletion. Thank you. Caliandson (talk) 08:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

What is your WP:COI? Sources are all press releases or unreliable. Secret account 03:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I'd like to bring to your attention that no press releases are cited on this Wikipedia page. The sources that are listed confirm TOPYX is a social LMS that is recognized as one of the first of its kind. While Learning Management Systems exist -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_learning_management_systems -- TOPYX is a social LMS. Would you mind reviewing the page again to confirm that there are no press releases cited? With much appreciation,Caliandson (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

[]
Hi Secret, If you take a closer look at the deletion discussion I think you will find strong consensus for the renamed topic. Admittedly the renamed list article needs some work. Could you please have another look? Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:50, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No time has been allowed for work on the unanimously agreed upon article subject. Candleabracadabra (talk) 03:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you willing to accept a userfy and work on it on your userpage? The extremely clear consensus on the AFD said that an article subject of list on South American companies in general is plausible and would accept it, however, not with the current content (one blue link, two red links, and a stub tag no sources) borderline A1/A3. There wasn't any rename and keep until your last second comment. It's relatively easy to create the new list by following the categories and source them and like I said in the AFD, I wouldn't have any objections. Thanks Secret account 03:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed there isn't much to preserve, but it would be good to get the redirects restored. I guess I will take a look when I am fresher. Thanks. Candleabracadabra (talk) 04:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Afd: M1 Derby (Australia)
Hi, I'd just like to know why this article was deleted when there was no consensus to do so? The count at the time of deletion was 3 delete, 3 oppose. Edits were also made only a few hours before deletion to resolve some concerns raised by those in the opposition. I would appreciate it if you reverted this deletion. I'm happy to take responsibility for improving the article. Ck786 (talk) 05:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

AFD is not a vote count, policy based comments indicate a consensus for deletion (WP:SNOW is not a valid rationale here), the source you linked was rebutted. Secret account 13:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Alison Rosen
Hello, I wrote the stub for this article, and I just wanted to drop you a line to let you know that I agree with your decision to delete this article almost 4 years ago. At that time, she was not yet notable, and I think you made the right decision to delete and salt. She is now notable, but that was only because of what she has done in the last few years. Cheers! Aaron north  (T/C) 00:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Username
And here I thought I had the most awesome username on Wikipedia guess I was wrong *g*  Whispe ring  03:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Lol thanks! I had this username since 2007 (I was among the first to use the usurp policy). I actually thought of this username as a WP:POINT as I was in some controversy back then regarding an administrative action I did and I was a victim of non-related severe off-wiki harassment. I left the project for a few weeks, but couldn't fully stay away and I wanted to come back "secret". First time that I recall heard a real compliment on the username. This is the only place I use this nick however. Thanks! Secret account 03:17, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Festival and Valley Line lrt line
Why did you remove the templates for next/previous lists on the Festival and Valley line ETS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingeroscar (talk • contribs) 04:54, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Apparently you are creating templates or articles of stations that do not exist against consensus. Recreate if/when those stations are confirmed by reliable sources. Secret account 05:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Pictou County Scotians
Debdeb18 (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2013 (UTC)Why did you delete the page Pictou County Scotians? It is a real ice hockey team I was not yet done creating.

Any evidence this club is notable per WP:GNG and WP:ORG, "real hockey team" isn't enough and the content provided no evidence of that. Secret account 05:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 06:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hackney Empire New Act of the Year
I'm not criticising your decision to deleted this article: "Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable competition; requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. None provided, nor found in Google News." Google News may not turn up much of value, but a Google web search for "Hackney Empire New Act of the Year" quickly produces: I have been very busy in real life and did not have time to respond in the 7 day timeframe. If you could you please reconsider un-deleting the article, I will add all of these sources within 24 hours. Edwardx (talk) 10:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2004/mar/03/comedy
 * http://www.thestage.co.uk/reviews/review.php/35083/new-act-of-the-year-final-2012
 * http://www.chortle.co.uk/features/2013/01/29/17058/naty_new_act_of_the_year_2013_final

Done as contested prod. Secret account 02:56, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Edwardx (talk) 05:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Ron Pederson
Hello, as someone recreated this from scratch, I restored as a refund. Dloh cierekim  16:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The Cross Border Rivalry
why was The Cross Border Rivalry deleted. It is a growing rivalry that has received a lot of publicity in Australia, mainly Melbourne and Adelaide, and I see absolutely no reason why the article should be deleted. If you believe that this article should be deleted, than rivalries of very similar calibre, notability and intensity should be deleted. These are some articles regarding rivalries who are almost the exact same feeling and notability Melbourne Derby and Big blue. Looking at your wikipedia profile I can see how you're not from Australia, and that you have deleted other rivalry articles causing questions. I'd like to formally discuss the deletion with you, kind regards, Crelache. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 02:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Cross Border Rivalry. Consensus was to delete the article (and most of the other rivalry articles, many of which had clearer, near unanimous consensus to delete). I'm simply the AFD administrator here, I can't really offer an opinion on the article topic. The best I could do is userfy the article content to your userspace to see if you can improve the article using available reliable sources that makes the rivalry meets the notability criteria (the debate was on the weaker side of consensus with four comments, three deletes which was perfectly fine policy wise and one keep voter who claimed WP:BEFORE which was inappropriate usage however). When your done, talk to those editors in the football wikiproject who nominated the article for deletion. If they OK it, I would move it back to namespace per proper policy. Secret account 03:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

its a pitty that the page Mathias Fuchs has been deleted, what would somebody have to do to create it anew with amended and improved input?
its a pitty that the page Mathias Fuchs has been deleted, what would somebody have to do to create it anew with amended and improved input? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4B82:2D37:7579:339:982:92AF (talk) 09:07, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Seamus Heany
The article has a one-sentence update. That's not Kosher. You should pull it from ITN til it's fixed. μηδείς (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the update Medeis, is it enough? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Cross Border Rivalry
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Cross Border Rivalry. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Macktheknifeau (talk) 07:18, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello Secret!
Hello Secret, I have seen Group For Buddies article which is deleted by you. I want to know can I start this article by information with me. AdamSmithUS (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI
There is a question on my talk page, User_talk:Edgar181, about a page that you recently deleted. Please feel free to comment there if you wish. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Texas
Hi. I was gnoming through Category:State awards and decorations of the United States and was going to move the 15+ Texas ones into their own subcategory Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Texas but found it had been recently deleted on July 21, 2013 (deletion log entry) because the category was empty. Any objections to its recreation now that it will have content? &mdash; MrDolomite &bull; Talk 04:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (It's about a Ron Gates sock, not really about you). I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Kudos for the admission
...of merely glancing at the Interpreter afd. (alas, better, IMO, is for those mildly interested in getting a grip on the issues being discussed to recuse themselves from nomming or !voting in such cases; but that's an ideal Wikipedia, not the one in the real world we are stuck with). Too many admins, etc., and !voters are not as forthcoming, I believe.--Hodgdon&#39;s secret garden (talk) 18:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Brian Penny
Could you userify Brian Penny for me? I want to look into some sources and see if the ole chap might be notable somehow. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. I didn't find any reason for optimism after my searches. Biosthmors (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Tris Speaker/GA1
Just a friendly reminder that you still need to get back to finish this review. It's been about two weeks since you last posted. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Adrian Piper
I really think that the Adrian Piper page should be undeleted. I fully appreciate that the subject is unhappy with the biographical information but Adrian Piper is notable for many reasons. Her art is taught in many universities and it seems odd that there is no wikipedia page about her anymore. Not least because students of the history and theory of art, as well as students of philosophy, now lack a useful resouce. If the biographical information is the problem, that section could be deleted. I strongly feel there should be a review of the deletion of the Adrian Piper page. Totorotroll (talk) 11:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Cross Border Rivalry
I don't understand why you have deleted the Cross Border Rivalry article, between Melbourne Victory FC and Adelaide United FC as there are many references, as well as something that has evolved in the space of 9 years, poor form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crelache (talk • contribs) 04:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)