User talk:Airplaneman/Archive 31

rebetiko protection and vandals
Hi, as with the article rebetiko the same vandals/sockpuppets are constantly attacking Music of Greece, Laïkó, Zeibekiko, Çiftetelli, Skiladiko, Larissa and other Greek music articles. It get's better: After several warnings one of them (User:Plouton2 most likely a sockpuppet) made a new article (Zeimbekiko) and copy-pasted there all the previously reverted "text" from the vandalized Zeibekiko article!!! Then User:Rchard2scout came by (a "real" user, no sockpuppet) and proposed a merge of the two articles!!!!! the users are:User:Plouton2, User:79.129.15.249, User:62.38.21.106, User:94.69.227.28 and another one was allready blocked for 24h. If you have some time or suggestions on the matter please help! thanks! (ps:I' am sending this message to you and User:Tbhotch as you both seem to check these articles out)-Yangula (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Ugg boots
I noticed your intervention on that article and wanted to thank you for that, please stick around. The more experienced editors we can get on that article, the better it will be. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 17:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, it looks like a hot topic. I've watchlisted it. Airplaneman   ✈  14:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleted article: Hell (band)
Hi Airplaneman,

I know you're travelling at present so I don't expect a quick response. And perhaps I'm not asking the right person (I can't tell whether you deleted the article or you wrote it in the first place, though I suspect the former.) Anyway, I logged on today to create an article about the UK band Hell, who are just about to release their debut album, nearly thirty years after their first demo (!), but I see that there was already an article which has now been deleted. I understand that the subject of an article must be notable, and I can accept that despite their unique story this band don't count as that yet, but perhaps you can explain why the article was deleted, and send me a copy of it so I can see if I could improve it sufficiently to be accepted (or is that only possible for the person who created the article in the first place?)

Thanks in advance.

JaneVannin (talk) 06:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Warren L. Carpenter Entry
Hi! I am Warren Carpenter' daughter, and I just discovered that you removed my dad's Wikipedia pages based on copywrite infringement of his obituary published in The Gazette (Colorado Springs). (Q.v., "This article may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion as a copyright infringement of http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4191/is_20030709/ai_n10024682/.")

My sisters, my mother, and I wrote that obituary and we paid The Gazette to publish it. Doesn't that mean that we own the rights (and not the newspaper)?

I gave Terry Carpenter the right to use the obituary we wrote when Terry posted the Wikipedia page.

Please let me know if this circumstance is NOT a copyright infrigement (as I believe), so that Terry can repost this website to recognize and record for history my father's many achievements.

Thanks, Gray Carpenter Church

PS I have written to The Gazette to find out their stance on this matter. I have asked them to let me know if they do not have a problem with the text of our obit to be used in the page on my dad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.225.93 (talk) 03:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello Mrs. Church, Donating copyrighted materials gives detailed info on how to go about donating copyrighted materials (this is so the site avoids copyright lawsuits and whatnot). I know it's tedious, and I'm sorry about that :(. It may be best to first make sure that the subject (in this case your father) clearly meets our biography notability guideline. Also, diversifying on sources beyond the Gazzette article would also be beneficial. Please be aware that this is a conflict of interest, so be careful. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  14:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Airplaneman -- I've reworked the Warren L. Carpenter article on my userspace at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohee/Draft_of_Warren_L._Carpenter_article and would appreciate your assessment of its worthiness and readiness for moving to the mainspace. I believe I've addressed all the criticisms that got it deleted. Thank you for sharing your expertise.Cohee (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

RFC on the inclusion of a table comparing SI units and binary prefixes
Notice: An RFC is being conducted here at Talk:Hard diskdrive#RFC on the use of the IEC prefixes. The debate concerns this table which includes columns comparing SI and Binary prefixes to describe storage capacity. We welcome your input

You are receiving this message because you are a member of WikiProject Computing --RaptorHunter (talk) 18:05, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Martin Allen
Hi, do you know how to remove /noinclude that shows between Leicester and Cheltenham manager templates? Regards --palmiped | Talk  17:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing it. Has it been fixed? Airplaneman   ✈  13:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like it has. Regards --palmiped | Talk  15:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Moonrise help?
Hello Airplaneman! I'm in need of a bit of help, possibly. I will likely be quite busy this week, and the Moonrise GAN is on hold (once again, for reliable sources). I'm going to try to do this myself, but if you happen to have time, it'd be nice if you can find a RS for the UK publication dates (basically get rid of amazon from the citations). If an rs cannot be found, I personally suggest just modifying the article to say that the book was released to the rest of the world on so-and-so date, and cite american harpercollins for that date. I'm going to inform Princess as well (Derild seems inactive, otherwise, I'd ask him too). Another editor said on my talk that Moonrise's prose is reads rather complicated. I'd ask her to do a copyedit as she suggested, but I'm not sure if I want that to happen in the middle of a GAN. Opinion? and many thanks,  Bramble  claw  x   01:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey! Time is going by way too fast. Unfortunately, I'm extremely busy (probably for the same reason you are) and don't have much time to do any major work. I'll keep an eye on the article, though, and try to address issues if I can. A copyedit couldn't hurt. Airplaneman   ✈  13:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Maine Cottage
You speedily deleted this article under the author request criterion. My recollection is that content had been added to the article by an editor other than the author about the closure of this business, so I don't think that that criterion applies. The article has since been recreated and is under discussion at AfD. It would be help to inform that discussion if the previous content and sources could be restored. Can you please do that? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've restored the older revisions and commented at the AfD. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  13:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot
Thanks a lot, you have been most helpful compared to some ignorant users.--NovaSkola (talk) 16:28, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, Airplaneman   ✈  14:35, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Two new articles
Dear Airplaneman,

When you have a chance, could you please review two articles that I've posted on my sub-page (".../Yossi_Sheffi" and ".../Arkeia_Software") and let me know if you feel they're ready for the main space or if I need to make changes to them? Thank you as always!Michael Leeman (talk) 14:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Airplaneman, thank you for your recent message at my Talk page. Yes, some others have looked over these articles and have been very helpful indeed. Please know that I appreciate your getting back to me and I hope you have a wonderful summer! Take care.Michael Leeman (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hong Kong Sinfonietta
Hi Airplaneman, I'm starting to run out of ideas for the Hong Kong Sinfonietta page, so I'm using information from the Chinese page to assist myself. I am a violinist ♫ talk to me here!  23:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea; that page seems to have some content. It doesn't have references, though—if you could, it'd be nice to find some references in the Chinese language and use those to help both the Chinese and English Wikipedia articles. TRANSLATE states that you have to provide attribution, and gives instructions on how to do so there (when doing translating, etc. it's always good to keep copyright in mind). My level of Chinese reading comprehension isn't great, so I can't help in translating :/. Good work this far :D, Airplaneman   ✈  14:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
This is in regarding to your questioning my revert on the issue of protection for Dear Friend Hitler. undefinedBill william compton Talk   22:04, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Friend Hitler
Please do something as these things won't come down unless you take some action. It is like their routine, they remove content from the page, I revert it and give them warning, after that they come in any other form (like now as anonymous user). And please don't go on "if multiple users keep up the unconstructive editing" case, try to understand the motives behind these edits, it is like some sort of periodic activity they do in some kind of hope that they would success without getting attention, which is really disturbing. undefinedBill william compton Talk   23:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I do realize that this is an ongoing problem. As it has continued at length in the past few days, I've semi-protected the page for a month. However, I suspect that this may not be enough, and as the newly registered accounts gain autoconfirmed status, they will be able to bypass the protection. Anyways, I do suspect meatpuppeting and/or sockpuppeting. I'm afraid I may have to upgrade to full protection. Another solution would be to deal with the editors (blocks and such), but I don't want to go and step on too many toes with such brute force. I think that may cause more harm than good (instead of calming things down, it'll feed the flame). Since I'm busy in real life (I'm only really active @ RFPP these days to keep the backlog down), just drop a note over here or at RFPP if things get out of hand. I have watchlisted the page. Airplaneman   ✈  02:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for page protection and yes, you're completely right, this is clearly a WP:MEAT. I'll let you know at RFPP, if this disturbance remain active.  undefinedBill william compton  Talk   05:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I was really shocked when I came to this article - Nalin Singh (writer and cast member of movie), please check it. When they didn't allow to access the article, they chose this way. It is clearly their blatant attempt to use Wikipedia for advertising themselves and their movie. This is my request that first delete this article (after observing previous attempts made on the main article (Dear Friend Hitler) and considering their narcissistic demands (refer my talk page) there is no need to wait for ten days) then [if it is possible] do something for these users and IPs, because I don't think they would ever stop, Thanks. undefinedBill william compton Talk   14:17, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia for advertisement

AfD

 * Dear sir, your lovely opinion is required at Articles for deletion/Air France Flight 7. Thanks and best. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 05:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Another rev-del
this its not as urgent as its in Spanish. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 09:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Airplaneman   ✈  17:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring in article "China's 2011 crackdown on dissidents"
Dear Airplaneman, since you are familiar with the article 2011 Chinese protests, I just wanted to inform you that there is vandalism or edit warring going on with the article China's 2011 crackdown on dissidents. The user Benlisquare, who has nominated 2011 Chinese protests AfD, also nominated China's 2011 crackdown on dissidents. Before the AfD discussion is over, he now has replaced 126 references in the article with "Citation needed" because of his personal doubt of WP:RS. I am a newbie and do not know what to do in a case like this. Although I was working on adding references and replacing the references with easily findable undoubtly reliable ones (google news search brings many reliable news agencies and newspapers reporting the same) - with all the former citations lost it is really hard for me to continue my work to improve the references. I would rather prefer the page undone to the version before the 126 references were deleted, and blocked for a few days until the AfD discussion will have ended instead of having an article with 126 "Citation needed" tags, which definitely will influence the AfD voters. But this is not to me to decide, therefore I contact you as an administrator. By the way, Benlisquare also nominated the following articles for deletion: Li Hai, Li Shuangde, Ding Mao, Chen Wei (dissident) all about Chinese dissidents, who were active in 1989 or in the founding of democratic parties (against the CCP) and are currently in arrest. Best, Waikiki lwt (talk) 13:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, I have started a discussion on the talk page. Zlqq2144 (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

GANs
Hey Airplaneman. Is there any rule against re-nominating for GA without any major improvements?  Bramble  claw  x   00:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If not, I need some sort of suggestion on how to get Moonrise to GA. I'm going to give it one more shot, but I've already pulled everything out of my sleeves, capes, and other magician's apparel, on the last GA.  Bramble  claw  x  

Notable?
I don't want to be rash and assume that policy is the same nowadays as when I was active, but do you think Xiomara Griffith is CSD worthy? Yes, random question, I know, but I'm working on an essay on another Griffith and it's bothering me to no end. =P · Andonic  contact 23:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Andonic. It's good to see you around here :). I would not delete Xiomara's article under WP:A7 or any other CSD criterion because I think notability is asserted (she won medals at a prominent sports event, the Pan American Games, and attended the Olympics). The article could use some referencing however. Frederick is comfortably above the notability threshold as well, I think. Happy writing, Airplaneman   ✈  18:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for the info. Good thing I asked before doing anything silly. ;) Cheers. · Andonic  contact 20:06, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

My Final Act
Airplaneman, I know I have not been on Wikipedia much anymore, so I decided to retire. As my final ever act as a Wikipedian, before I log off forever, I have decided to award you this barnstar.
 * This is extremely touching, Belugaboy. I'm happy to see that I've been of help, and am really sorry to see you go. I hope you decide to return someday. Best wishes, Airplaneman   ✈  22:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

DC Meetup: May 7 @ Tenleytown Library
The next DC Wikimedia meetup is scheduled for Saturday, May 7, 3:30-5:30 pm at the Tenleytown Library (adjacent to the Tenleytown Metro Station, Red Line), followed by dinner & socializing at some nearby place.

This is the first official meeting of our proposed Wikimedia DC chapter, with discussion of bylaws and next steps. Other agenda items include, update everyone on our successful Wikimania bid and next steps in the planning process, discuss upcoming activities that we want to do over the summer and fall, and more.

Please RSVP here and see a list of additional tentatively planned meetups & activities for late May & June on the Meetup/DC page.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

Well that worked
Look who managed to get past your bot denial on Jubileeclipman's talk...  Bramble  claw  x   01:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr LOL. Hmmm... I'm confuzzled... Airplaneman   ✈  21:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Afterworld (anime)
Hi Airplaneman,

I was just looking at the Afterworld (anime) article, and was about to remove the speedy deletion tag from it (but leave the prod tag in place), when I noticed that you had deleted it. I think that the article in no way qualified for speedy deletion under A7, as it certainly wasn't about a real person, animal, or organization, and there was no evidence that it was web content. Perhaps the article could have qualified under criterion G3 as an obvious hoax, but the reason you gave in the edit summary for deleting it was A7. If you think it would have qualified for G3 then it is fine to leave it deleted, but if you don't think it would have qualified as a G3 then I ask that you undelete it and allow the prod to run its course. Regardless, please don't delete articles under criterion A7 unless they actually meet that criteria (in case it isn't clear, I don't really care about this specific article, only that criterion A7 is applied correctly). Calathan (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I will. Thanks for the note, Airplaneman   ✈  14:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Calathan (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Not noteworthy ?
Hello,

I recently posted a new article about some team members of somewhereelseland. I understand that the article was made quite quickly, and I intended to work much more on it, however, at that time I was not able to finish.

The reason I feel this is noteworthy is because two of the team members, are world record holders, which seems to me noteworthy, and this is a project that is consistently underway, that is, they operate under this name.

I thank you for your time and consideration, let me know what I need to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iskarandos (talk • contribs) 13:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi :). I think this article could pass the notability guidelines if it can be backed up with multiple reliable sources to verify the information presented and to prevent questions of notability. I've taken a look at the article again and do realize that it was deleted soon after it was created. If you'd like, I'll restore the article to User:Iskarandos/Somewhereelseland so we can work on it together (it's hard to get the "encyclopedic" tone just right on your first try—in fact, my first two pages were deleted!) I did a quick google search of the group; although it seems that they've garnered quite a following, I don't see much coverage on them beyond video/picture sharing sites and social media sites such as blogs and facebook. To have good sourcing, more trusted or authoritative sources such as books or news outlets (can't trust them all of the time, but they usually provide better information than, say, the average blog). If you can find at least a few of these types of sources backing up, say, world record claims and other key notability points, I think the article certainly stands a chance. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  01:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and  who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (April 2011)
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wikiproject NASCAR at 16:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC).

Favor?
Hello, could you please semi-protect User talk:Nascar1996/Archive 14 and User talk:Nascar1996/Archive 15 as user request? Thanks. -- Nascar 1996  (talk • contribs) 16:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ — G FOLEY   F OUR  — 17:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gfoley4. -- Nascar 1996  (talk • contribs) 19:41, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Abortion moves
If you consider yourself an uninvolved admin when it comes to abortion related articles, I'd like to draw your attention to two move discussions Talk:Pro-life and Talk:Abortion-rights_movement. I'd like for you to comment on two things. Do you think Anthony Appleyard was an uninvolved admin in the matter? And do you agree with the closures (that one discussion had a clear consensus and was within policy, while the other had no clear consensus)? I am looking for review of these admin actions by an uninvolved admin (and sure, give me a slap on the wrist for wheel warring or whatever, I'm not above scrutiny by any means).-Andrew c [talk] 23:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello Andrew. I do consider myself relatively uninvolved in abortion articles in that I rarely edit them. I did, however, move-protect the page Abortion-rights movement a few hours ago. I do not recall myself taking any other major action or being involved in any discussion over abortion-related articles (feel free to prove me wrong on that one). Now for some (relatively quick) comments:
 * On the Pro-life movement article, first and foremost, why is someone a) beginning a move discussion and then b) closing it? That is my gut reaction from investigating straight from your above post and not reading any other opinions about the actions taken by Anthony on this matter. They're certainly involved, and their opinion may therefore be more present in their actions related to the subject than someone who is mostly uninvolved in the matter (they certainly still would have an opinion, but would enter the debate with a cleaner slate, allowing for a more neutral assessment of the debate). As someone who actively participated in the ensuing discussion, it wasn't the best idea for them to go ahead and close it. One thing I'd like to distinguish here is the difference between being bold and this. I think I may have, possibly more than once, proposed a merger and gone ahead with it myself when no objections were raised. I have also closed some template for deletion discussions that had no comments other than the one from the nominator. But it's case-by-case, and in a discussion as large as the one being investigated, it certainly could've used an outside eye for analysis. I do realize that requested moves is a chronically backlogged venue, but I do not believe that justifies any action that would otherwise not be taken in a situation such as this.
 * I do agree that there was no consensus to move this article. I'll go a step further and say that I thought many of the supporting arguments (for the move) were weak in comparison to those who opposed the move.
 * As for the debate on Talk:Abortion-rights movement, there was a general swing towards supporting the move. Consensus in this case was not the definitively, absolutely, dead-on, clear-cut, go-ahead and move right now kind of deal, but in debates such as these on content as touchy as abortion, it almost never is. However, I do see quite easily why Anthony chose to close the discussion and move the page, as I most likely would have done the same thing myself. One thing I'd like to note is this comment made about the move and subsequent moves. It sums up my thoughts exactly. Anthony was, on the whole, uninvolved in this discussion and closed it appropriately in accordance to community consensus. However, his actions at the second RM (Pro-life) were not the best. Another admin should have been asked to close it because by that time, Anthony was very much involved in the matter.
 * I don't believe anyone is perfect, and nor should anyone be expected to perform perfectly and do the "right" thing every time. That's basically impossible, and harder still when one is dealing with a matter that hits close to home. As such, Anthony may need to be reminded of this, but I see no drastic action necessary beyond that. Thanks for stopping by, Andrew, and I hope I've done your query justice. Best, Airplaneman   ✈  01:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thorough reply. Follow up question based on your opinion (not admin related): does it not trouble you at all that we now have a situation that lacks parity, in that we allow the pro-life movement's term of self identity to be in the article title, but went with the more "neutral", AP styleguide term for the pro-choice movement (abortion-rights)?-Andrew c [talk] 02:24, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. It would indeed be ideal to give the articles "fair" and equal treatment in order to maintain neutrality and avoid accusations of being biased towards one side or another. Mor simply, though, it's for consistency's sake that we should try and balance the article names. Airplaneman   ✈  03:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research
Hi ,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)