User talk:Aditya/Archives/Apr/2009

Reported username
You appear to have reported User:Jewpedia should be vandalized to the Usernames for administrator attention page; however, there does not seem to be any such user account. Can you tell me where you saw this account name? -- The Anome (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * See this. Anti  venin  16:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't feel bad about this incident; it's just a relic of the way some of the more obnoxious cases are handled. I wouldn't want you to feel that your reputation has been in any way compromised, because it hasn't; nor would I want to see you discouraged from reporting inappropriate names in the past. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps my decision to quit UAA was a bit hasty. I was simply surprised at the bad faith assumptions by certain admins. That's all. Anti  venin  07:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Re عائلة_ابوبك
as per the article here is a google translation .There still needs to be re fences added.

Regards Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 08:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:UAA
Regarding, in the future, please show some common sense and do not report libelous usernames or usernames with personal information publicly to pages like this. You are compounding the problem by spreading the vandalism. I'll be removing that edit once you have seen this. If you come across something like this again, use Requests for oversight, rather than publicizing the username. Dominic·t 00:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Why AfD frustrates me
Copying my comments from WP:VPM.

I would suggest taking it to deletion review. For one, it is a non-admin closing by someone already involved in the discussion. It should have been left to an admin. --Farix (Talk) 11:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I can appreciate your dedication to a cause, but please see: WP:FORUMSHOP for some possibly relevant information. The article has a talk page, an AfD discussion, and now there's postings to the help desk, the village pump, and AN/I. Normally the AfD discussion is sufficient to decide the fate of an article. Thanks for your time and consideration. — Ched : ?  16:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why it was cross-posted to the Help desk and the Village pump, but the article talk page and closed AfD discussion wouldn't be the correct place to bring it up, and I don't see any evidence that Antivenin knew anything about the AN/I thread. Since both pump and help desk threads were started at the same time, this also isn't "asking the other parent" scenario...so I'm not sure your forumshop link is quite appropriate. --Onorem♠Dil 16:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm not suggesting any deliberate wrong doing at all; if my link suggests that, then I do apologize. I was merely pointing out a section of guideline that Antivenin may have overlooked or be unaware of.  I believe that the Canvassing guideline suggests that it's better to maintain discussions in the areas that are most relevant. I didn't even mention the soapbox and point links simply because I do assume good faith.  It's just that the help desk and village pump are hardly the areas to search for input on an AfD discussion.  I'm curious though Onorem, if you think an AfD and article talk page aren't the place to discuss the issue of deletion, where would be the proper place? — Ched :  ?  19:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * An AfD is the place to discuss the issue of deletion. That venue was shut down prematurely by someone who had already involved themselves in the discussion. At that point, arguments against the specific AfD closure belonged at DelRev...but I could see where comments about the process in general could be reasonably discussed at either the pump or the help desk. --Onorem♠Dil 19:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can see where you're going with this, Ched. The AfD was closed early (and that too a non-admin closure). I can't edit an archived topic, and my question was about how WP:BLP1E and WP:SNOW are to be applied to AfDs. It was effectively a policy question and so the Help Desk and the policy section of the Village Pump would be the appropriate places to ask my question. I know what canvassing is, and I know cross-posting is a bad idea, but I was paranoid and also quite irritated. Onerem, do you still think I should take it for DRV since the AfDs been opened? Anti  venin  00:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As long as it remains open for the duration, there wouldn't be any point I can think of to go to DRV with it. I doubt after all the closing and opening that's gone on that anyone is going to close it early again. --Onorem♠Dil 00:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's closed a day early, but what the heck. Fat chance of it being deleted/redirected anyway. Thanks for the assistance though. I appreciate it. =) Anti  venin  07:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, regardless of anyone's view on the keep/delete end of it (and I think there are good arguments on both), I think everyone will admit it certainly hasn't been your typical AfD ;) ... Best — Ched : ?  04:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)  (and I'll also admit that I see where Antvenin was going with this better now too).
 * Yes, it hasn't been a typical AfD, and I don't know why I felt so strongly about it either. I'm not usually one to go against consensus (no matter how wrong I think it might be). This was quite an experience for me. =P Anyway, it's a 'keep' now so there's nothing I can do anymore. Anti  venin  07:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hopefully she'll become notable enough that everyone will be happy to accept the article. I like it better when the community works together to build the wiki and doesn't get divided like it did on this one. :) Best, and happy editing. — Ched :  ?  14:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That is, of course, the desired outcome. If that doesn't happen I'll renominate. This has got to be the suckiest AfD ever. It was invaded by people who had absolutely no clue of Wiki policies. =(
 * Live and learn. A lot of work to be done. I can't get caught up on one AfD. Best to you too. Anti  venin  15:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

On Boyle
Please see my most recent comment. I'm curious if you still hold you opinion from a few days ago. -- \/\/slack (talk) 02:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The debate is now archived so I cannot edit it. I still agree with my initial point of view. I do not think she is notable (even after reading the news article/bio that you linked to). I shall not, however, further appeal to WP:DRV, etc., as I'm so vastly outnumbered. Anti  venin  07:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

No flagged revisions category up for deletion
The category associated with the no flagged revisions userbox you have placed on your user page is up for deletion at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009 April 23 and you are invited to share your opinions on the issue. Alansohn (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Nitelinger
Thanks for the head's up re: the spelling on his user page - I've fixed that and removed your comment on the talk (hope you don't mind me removing you comment but there didn't seem a need for a resolved tag on what is in effect a memorial page) Pedro :  Chat  15:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * As I specified in my message, I wanted the comment removed after it had been resolved. Thanks for taking care of that. =) Anti  venin  07:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Man - I never even saw that bit of your note - face palm! If I could read I'd be dangerous :) Pedro : Chat  07:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * =P Well no harm done. Again, thanks for taking care of that. Though I don't understand why that page has to be protected. Anti  venin  07:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Canvassing
Just to be clear about this, I have nothing against Alansohn directing me to the deletion page. I would never have found out about this otherwise. Anti venin  07:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your clarification.


 * However, the issue isn't whether you (or anyone else canvassed) are upset for being canvassed. The issue is that canvassing you and everyone else who had the userbox (and thus the category) on their user page, is inappropriate, per WP:CANVASS. (And this prohibition has been common practice even long before that page existed). I hope this helps clarify. - jc37 08:02, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page. Anti  venin  16:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Jc37, I read your reply on my talk page, and I still agree with Alansohn on this one. There's a pretty fine line between friendly notices and excessive cross-posting, but Alansohn was right to give a chance to people to defend the category (after all, only those who have a particular user box know why they want it). Anti venin  16:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I intend to leave a note for those concerned on his and my talk pages, but since I had responded to you already, I thought I'd leave a quick response here first.
 * The general rule for all XfD is: If you want to know whether a particular page is up for deletion, place it on your watchlist.
 * And further, it's long been considered disruptive to use user categories to notify users of an XfD discussion. One case involving an article up for deletion (concerning a local school) comes immediately to mind.
 * If this had been done for an AfD discussion, other admins would likely have been blocked immediately, to try to prevent further disruption. But I decided in this case that a warning should be enough, since he's shown himself responsive to warnings in the past.
 * I hope this clarifies.
 * If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask. - jc37 00:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, I unified this discussion here, since we had already started discussing, and trying to avoid it spread across several talk pages, and everyone copy-pasting responses : )

That said, you're welcome to remove this discussion in entirety (per WP:TALK), and for that matter, to continue to comment elsewhere, if you so choose. - jc37 00:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I was trying to unify the discussion too when I posted on your talk page. But never mind now. Adding multiple pages on your talk page is cumbersome, and it is much more convenient to be reminded by someone else. Would it still be canvassing if I explicitly mentioned (on my user page, or talk page) that I want to be informed if any page or category I have been involved with is up for deletion? A  v  N  11:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "cumbersome" - If you're not interested enough to watch it, why should someone else do it for you? : ) - jc37 23:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In short, because I *hate* using my watch list. I try to remember pages to check by memory... I don't think I've used my watch list till date. A  v  N  05:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)