User talk:Anthony Bradbury/Archive10

Happy New Year, Anthony.bradbury
Also, thanks again for the nomination earlier this year. I've almost been an admin for six months now; I hope I have lived up to your expectations. :) Acalamari 22:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. Acalamari 17:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks re User:Nicollegardner93
Thanks for leaping in and helping out with that user. -- Roleplayer (talk) 20:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Username.
Hello Anthony. bradbury. This is WikiSandbox1 and I am replying on behaf of myself.

I would just like to be aware that the username I chose was something for me to remember. Though I would ask you not to worry about it because other people get envoved and then it becomes a big hassal.

When I created this account it was hard to find a username because all the ideas had were already taken. So the only thing I remembered was the sandbox (previous experiences)

Can I ask you something? How did you that I was indending to be a serious contributer to Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you something, if you are writing a complaint, could you please write you complaint in the complaint section of my talk page. I know its annoying but it just keeps everything neat. I would appericiate that.

Dont worry, because I could predict that someone else will remide me.

WikiSandbox1 (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Armenian Forgeries
Thanks for the note on the Armenian Forgeries article. I'm still figuring out how to apply the speedy deletion criteria. I have watchlisted the page, so I'll make sure it goes to AfD if the prod tag is removed. Karanacs (talk) 21:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I knew you weren't criticizing (sorry to imply the opposite); I do appreciate your following up with me on the article. Karanacs (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:UAA
Alright, will keep that in mind :-) LightAnkhC|MSG 12:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Editing Under the Influence
Hello AB. I was perusing WP:KEEPCOOL as I sometimes do, and noticed that the above-noted essay had become a redlink. I am wondering if you might be willing to list it at MfD rather than deleting it just yet? I am not expressing an opinion about whether it should be deleted, as I have only a vague recollection of it, having last looked at it many months ago. Also, I am not sure if some of it might be mergeable into WP:KEEPCOOL. Thanks. Cheers, -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 17:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for that. Now that I can read it, I can see why you and the anon who nominated it for speedy-delete thought it was unfunny, and there is nothing mergeable into another article if the consensus is that it be deleted. I don't think that CSD G1 is applicable here, however. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 18:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I know that I am giving you a bit of a hard time about this, and even I as do so I keep in mind my appreciation for all the work you put in here. You have helped me out on at least one occasion in the past. The fate of the essay is no big deal to me, but I would like to clarify something about your use of CSD G1. I have seen other admins use it to delete something that they find unimpressive, or to delete something when they are unsure which CSD criterion to use. So I thought I would at least begin by speaking to individual admins when I see it happening (when pages get speedied when they could use some wider community discussion). I don't think that this is, as you suggest, a matter of my definition of "nonsense" being different from yours. CSD G1 applies only to "patent nonsense" as described in Patent nonsense. That guideline specifically says that "incompetent and/or immature material" does not fall under the definition. Thanks again for your dedication to Wikipedia, -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 22:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:Jimbo_Wales
Hi Anthony,

where do you suggest the discussion that developed be discussed further, now that you archived the page? Martintg (talk) 22:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, I should have checked the talk page history first, the edit history comment of the archiver also suggested WP:VP as the appropriate place for continuing the discussion. I assumed your comment regarding "don't feed the trolls" was by the archiver as it was the last, being the way it is usually done in the area I contribute in. Martintg (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Del
I thought well I read an article that said write about yourself or your company I started that an before i was finish the page was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itpeligo (talk • contribs) 23:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Replying to you (sorry for the late reply )
I am so sorry for the late reply, I have been busy in real life that I havent had a chance to reply. I do hope you are not angry with me for this

I'm sorry for the critisisam comment that I made, I thought you were trying to force me to change my mind. But I appreciate you giving me the option to do what I want.

If you are really busy in real life, you do a good job with replying to comments.

Where did you find out all the edits I have made? Because I found I really strange that you said it was obvious.e Anyway, what I am doing currently is nearly finished.

Oh and Happy Wikiing to you as well, what are you editing?

If possible reply and the new Apple Mac Book Air came out

Seeya!!!

WikiSandbox1 (talk) 04:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

PS: For me its not easy for me to think of other names

Hey
Hello, now, I don't have much time to type. As you'll know by the username(and the message here) I'm your old adoptee. I'm very busy until about the 19th. I'll make my userpage now, and I'm now asking you to, if possible, copy/paste the old page to my current one. and quick! Kfc 18645  talk  11:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for a quick one. Kfc 18645  talk  11:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll try redirecting-as many quys would still search for Kfc1864. Kfc 18645  talk  11:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Why so harsh?
Recently, you indef. blocked User talk:GM WINS, AND THAT'S FINAL. What is GM? Car company? Is this a person interested in cars and who read that GM may now be only the 2nd largest in the world in terms of production?

Account creation was also blocked so this person can't fix the mistake by creating a new name. It's not like the GM account was used for vandalism or the name contained profanity (for example User:GM is the same as admin -- Both are bloody idiots)

Since unblocking account creation doesn't seem too drastic, I've done that. Archtransit (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion for The Other Nite Show
Hi, I'd like to request you delete The Other Nite Show. It is a non notable community radio show from a minor AM station (and therfore not notable, if you don't delete it any other Australian community radio show could put up a page. Cheers, Ryan. 122.148.64.45 (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 18:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Welcome
You are unaware of how I appreciate comments such as that. It is nice to return my regards to you, and your extension of good faith helped me through the time at the noticeboard. I very much look forward to working with you in the future, and as the last email we had was regarding blocks, if you ever need to tell me something that I have done incorrectly, don't hesitate to ask why it may have been done et cetera. on my talk page or via other means. Kindest regards, Rudget . 14:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Cyclin-dependent kinase 5
Hi. When you have deleted this article under the move was already be done by, and now the article do not longer exist. Can you restore it? —Banus (talk) 13:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

User apparently requests unblocking. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Winterfold House School
Hello. You deleted Winterfold House School, under A7. However, hasn't there been a discussion that school's cannot be deleted under A7? -  Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  23:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No, the article should definitely stay deleted. But just a notice, that after a long discussion, schools are not to be deleted undert A7. But, no the article should not be restored. Thanks! -  Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  19:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's Day!


FLc is wishing you a Happy Valentine's Day! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the love by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

Relisting AfDs
When relisting AfDs (such as this one), please be sure to comment out the entry on the original AfD log page and add it to the current day's AfD log page. You can read more about this here. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA withdrawn
I have followed your advice. Thanks, George D. Watson (Dendodge). (talk) 22:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

An admin's perspective?
Greetings, A.b. Having just given new user 68DANNY2 some lengthy advice on the subject of attaining adminship, I spotted your comments to him on the topic. I've been editing since late 2005, and have never yet seriously looked into becoming an admin. If you've a moment, might you take a look at my history and share your thoughts regarding my suitability as an admin candidate? My track record isn't spotless; I have been involved in some talk-page quibbles and once received a short block when I got carried away and violated 3RR, though I have tried (and, I think, largely succeeded) to stay within bounds. Nevertheless, I probably have areas that need improvement — perhaps there aren't enough of certain kinds of edits in my history, or maybe there are some Wiki protocols I'm not yet properly adhering to, or things of that nature. I'm not necessarily gunning for adminship, but I'd like to have an admin's perspective. If you haven't got the time, that's OK too. Please and thank you. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Much obliged! —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly for your assessment. I'll look into working in the directions you suggest. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This Scheinwerfermann has been wikistalking me from article to article, contributing little but disorder, questionable 'facts' and disruption. I can't believe you're considering him for some kind of administration status.  He deletes, twists, and turns into gibberish, portions of articles for no apparent reason that I can see, until now, other than to rack up 'edits'.  I didn't realize there were benefits to padding your edit counts.  Maybe I should try that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.58.130 (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * 64.107.58.130, I have opened a Wikiquette alert regarding our clashes on various articles, with an eye towards a resolution as quick and hassle-free as possible. I welcome and encourage you to come and contribute to the discussion. In the meantime, let's both remember to keep our comments civil and appropriately placed (this isn't the right place). —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 01:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Proxy?
Hi, Anthony. When do we use proxies? If I knew, i've forgotten. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  Deleted?  16:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I did not think there was such a thing. I'm afraid the closer I look, the less confidence I feel in the nominees readiness. < > Dloh  cierekim  Deleted?  16:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

James McKeown
Hi. The article James McKeown, which you deleted in August, should be restored as he has now made an appearance in a fully professional league, and so passing WP:BIO. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 00:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome messages
Hello Anthony, I wish to apologise for my reply to your message on the 5th, my mass welcoming of new users was inappropriate and somewhat pointless. I have lately been applying myself to patrolling the User Creation Log and reporting any username violations, reverting vandalism from new users and only welcoming those new users who have made at leat one positive contribution. I would be glad of some feedback from yourself about my contributions, are they useful do you think?

Thank you for your consideration, Polly  ( Parrot ) 19:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for James McKeown
An editor has asked for a deletion review of James McKeown. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of MV Lyubov Orlova
I'm sorry, but I don't get it. It was tagged as spam and wiped. Can you explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodeime (talk • contribs) 05:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Air
Hello, I've removed the prod tag from Eastern Air. I've found a reference here proving its existence. As always, if you disagree with my decision, you can nominate the article at AFD. Regards,  Jd 027  chat 22:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Tolkien
Oh yeah, I am sorry about that. Anyway, those specialised tolkien stuff ain't belong here. I remember that there is a Wookiepedia as well. Anyway, thank you for your AGF. I will keep a watch on free use stuff. Weltanschaunng 15:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Edmund von Glaise-Horstenau
Another editor has added the  template to the article Edmund von Glaise-Horstenau, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hiya
Hi Anthony, thanks for your kind words. I noticed your decreased activity over the past few days and am really glad to see you back! :) Hope you're well. ~ Riana ⁂ 17:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's great news! (About your new partner, not your damaged cable!) I think you deserve all the happiness you can get, so congrats. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 17:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Anna Davlantes article
The article on Anna Davlantes was deleted by you per the log: 15:45, 7 May 2007 Anthony.bradbury (Talk | contribs) deleted "Anna Davlantes" ‎ (NN TV presenter)

I don't see the rationale for it. Any advice to why it was deleted? She has some links from other stories, but they go to an empty article. I see no logs about it. I was tempted to develop one, but had second thoughts until I know why you are deleting it. http://www.nbc5.com/meetthenewsteam/1189124/detail.html

QUESTION
Mr. Jimbo Wales OR TO WHOEVER IT MAY CONCERN, I was searching on wikipedia for an actor and movie and it came up in Italian. The only other languages they had were Dutch and Spanish. Can you try to fix this??? PLEASE --70.160.145.95 (talk) 12:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Fempiror History
I'm sorry if you think that I made the wrong decision, I blanked the page as it was a direct copy from http://www.fempiror.com/history.html which states that "The Fempiror Chronicles in its events, characters, history, language, peoples, and situations is based on the book The History and Language of the Fempiror Race and the Felletterusk Empire by George Willson, copyright 2005 and WGA #1124419. All rights reserved.". The previous content of the page was still easily viewable though the page history and I left a note on the page to let an admin know that it had been blanked. The page is a direct copy of a copyrighted work and I would assume is a violation of copyright law as well as going against Wikipedia's non-free content policy and fundamental principles. With this in mind I thought the extra two clicks needed to view the information would be less harmful than leaving it up in the mainspace for everyone to see. I am sorry if I acted inappropriately, I thought that it was the correct course of action under the circumstances, I had waited for two hours for an admin to delete the material and none had. Guest9999 (talk) 15:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really an issue anymore, I brought it up on the Administrators' noticeboard (what I probably should have done in the first place) and the article's been deleted. Again sorry if I did not act in the correct manner. Guest9999 (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip, I'll remember next time. No offense was taken, I just wasn't sure of the correct procedure in such a situation, thanks for the help. Guest9999 (talk) 17:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Drive By Greetings
Hi Tony. Listening with my water glass (spying on talk pages!) I noticed that you mentioned that you have a new partner in your life. Wonderful news! As ever, warmest wishes from my family to yours. Pedro : Chat

Long time no see!


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. You will be pleased to hear that today is my 1st edit anniversary. NHRHS2010 | Talk to me  22:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings
Just wanted to dedicate my 750th edit to you... Davidelit (talk) 05:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

RFA
Ok thanks for the advice. Cheers(Rhinostampede (talk) 15:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC))

March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter
This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - -  Newsletter Bot  Talk  14:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Eleserock7894
I just deleted his last bit of nonsense when I saw your block. I award you this ASCII asterisk (*) for immense patience and incredible lenience. --Dweller (talk) 13:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Wholly admiring! --Dweller (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

unblock request
Thanks for drawing my attention to it. I had checked back once but not in a couple of minutes. Toddst1 (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

AiV
I appologize for my recent misreporting of a vandal. I am using WikiMon and some of it's automated features are a bit heavy handed LeilaniLad (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV
Thank lord for the ban on the IP 85.12.64.151 - That person was vandalizing an article as I was reverting another, it was mad!--Cahk (talk) 11:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

speedy vs prod
You seem to have deleted Bob Barker Hall. using the deletion reason "db|no claim of notability for this planned college dorm)". Under what speedy specification is that? Its not a group or an organization but a building. DGG (talk) 13:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

CC Poindexter
You deleted this article under G5 as a created by a banned user. However, checkuser has cleared the author RobertOgleFan (as much as checkuser can). At any rate, the editor that he was accused of being a sock of has not been banned. Please consider undeleting this article. seresin ( ¡? ) 08:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Seresin, Mykungfu is forum shopping to find an admin to re-insert his sock-made POV edits on topics related to Alpha Phi Alpha--edits which are based on faulty cites, as was explained with consensus reached here.  As far as whether, Mykungfu is making recent abusive edits specifically with [user:RobertOgleFan], I would note that his/her MO has been to use several socks at one time, in good guy/bad guy fashion, which is why reports on Mykungfu (Suspected sock puppets/Mykungfu (6th)) contains so many socks. Even so, he still used user:RobertOgleFan to create a Mediation Cabal involving all of the editors that were responsible for reporting him earlier, even though some had no interaction with him in the current cases.  Additionally, Wikipolicy states, "Community bans may arise from consensus at the administrators' noticeboards (WP:AN, WP:ANI), the former community sanctions noticeboard (WP:CN), or elsewhere. As per the blocking and banning policies, users who alienate and offend the community enough may eventually be blocked long-term (most often indefinitely) by an administrator--with no administrator willing to unblock them. (see here) In such extreme cases, the user is considered to have been banned by the general community." Am I wrong in my understanding that miranda is simply following WikiPolicy related to editors Banned by the Wikipedia community?  Sorry for the long post, but you left me with some questions related to this sock.-   Ro   Bo   Tam   ice 14:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Mykungfu
Per this, could you please re-delete these pages under g5? Socks of banned editors aren't supposed to create new pages (and yes, he has been banned for almost 2 years for disruption, trolling, and POV pushing). Thanks.  m ir a nd a   20:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

TfD close?
Hi, AB. I wonder if you've a moment to wrap this up? It's languishing past the 7-day timeframe, and unless I'm misunderstanding the protocol, only an admin can close such discussions. I'm not an admin, but if I were, this would look a lot like a "Keep; no consensus to delete" to me. I will be interested to see if your judgment is the same or different. Thanks and regards, —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 01:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep, all taken care of, as it seems! Thanks for taking a look. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 14:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Mickey Modelle
I'd be interested to know why this page was deleted as non-notable when the artist qualifies under criteria 2 of WP:MUSIC having had several charting hits on at least 5 national charts. On this basis the deletion was incorrect can you undelete? -- neon white user page talk 02:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The article does document his chart singles and their entries and outlined in the summary why he was notable. Evidence of his top 10 UK hit and other chart hits can be found at and . This qualifies as under criteria 2 (Has had a charted hit on any national music chart) of WP:MUSIC as has 2 UK chart hits, 3 in ireland and 1 in belgium and sweden. -- neon white  user page talk 13:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There must be some error here as that is not the version of the article that i created. I don't know if this was the previous deleted article because i didnt write it or ever view it but there were no images in the article i created. -- neon white user page talk 20:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's it, i must have spelt it wrong. I've moved it to the proper name. i hope this version has enough to be notable. Thanks for your help! -- neon white user page talk 15:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:3O
Hey. I wasn't sure where you wanted me to respond, so I've responded on my talk page. Thanks. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 12:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

reply
But your considered medical opinion does not carry weight in the encyclopedia without quotable references, you wrote.

However, my medical judgement allows me insight when a reference is not reputable.

The fact remains that you state that you are a medical doctor on your user page. So do I. In my opinion, if I make such a statement, I should have some sort of verification. True, verification may be limited to some extent but it's the best we can do. Doctor Wikipedian (talk) 20:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Historical revisionism (revisionist historians)
User:Jpgordon just deleted the page above after I put up a hangon Tag. How do I appeal his decision? Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 17:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

WBOSITG's RfA
 Hello Anthony.bradbury, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your participation in my RfA which was passed with a final tally of 114/10/4. I'm both shocked and honoured to gain so much support from users whom I admire and trust, and I hope I can avoid breaking that backing by being the best administrator I possibly can. I will take on board the opposition's comments and I hope to improve over the coming months and years. Once again, thank you!  weburiedoursecrets inthegarden  20:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sneaker fetishism
Hi,

As you could probably tell from my article, I’m new to Wikipedia, so excuse my ignorance of the accepted practices here. I hope I am not asking too much of you to read my request to restore my article.

I tried my best to create an article that would document this real fetish. It is not a hoax, or a joke or any other attempt to fool anyone. I first realized I had this very specific fetish for canvas with rubber sole sneakers when I was only 6 years old. I knew then that it was not “normal” and I never told anyone. I then spent the next 28 year living with this secret, the whole time thinking I was some kind of freak.

Then in the early 90’s, with the advent of the Internet, I was able to discover that I wasn’t alone. I began to meet other people from all over the world that had a sneaker fetish. We formed mailing lists, FTP sites, Yahoo groups and Web pages devoted to our shared interest in sneakers.

I can still remember how relieved I was to know there were others like me. I gained a new confidence in myself and even found the courage to tell my girl friend. I can relate countless stories of people that joined one of our groups and expressed how excited they were to find hat they weren’t alone. My hope in creating this article was to document this fetish on an easily accessible and popular site so that others that thought they were alone could find the same happiness I did.

I know that this is not a common fetish, but just because it has not received the same publicity or social acceptance as heels, does not mean it isn’t real. And just because someone doesn’t understand it, does not give them the right to attack or mock it. Homosexually was once considered a “hoax” and attacked and mocked. I had hoped that the people that read my article would have taken the time to read all the information, references and links I provided. I had hoped they would have shown tolerance to something new and different.

Everything I have included in my article is true and based on actual facts. I worked hard to find legitimate sources to substantiate it. I know the article could use more work and I have been trying to add more information as I get time. But, because this is a somewhat rare and relatively new fetish (sneakers have been around for less than 100 years) there are few traditional or medical references. Most of the sources that truly document this fetish are for members, like Yahoo Groups and web pages. This group, http://sneaker-groups.com/, has hundreds of members.

If you agree that my article might be restored, I also ask that you could offer me some advice or guidance on how to improve it and make it a worthy addition to Wikipedia.

Thank you for you time, Rob

Opalrustywiki (talk) 03:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Rajiv ganatra
I meant to hit the a7 tag and didn't. Sorry. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Dolgrim
Hello! :) In November, Dolgrim was nominated for deletion. At the time, there was no suitable page for this article to be redirected to, so based on the consensus, you deleted the article. I have created a new page, List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters, which would be a proper destination to merge and/or redirect the article to. I'm wondering if it's possible to restore the original article, and turn it into a redirect, thus preserving the edit history? BOZ (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, you're right that Dolgrim should be mentioned in the list. It's on the long to-do list for the project. :) If you'd feel more comfortable about it, I could make sure it gets added before you do the restore/redirect. BOZ (talk) 13:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks you, sir! :) BOZ (talk) 20:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem - that's the last one I was waiting for, and I'm glad I won't have to worry about that over the long weekend. :) Thanks again! BOZ (talk)

Doctor Wikipedian
East718 determined that Doctor Wikipedian is a sock of banned Dereks1x, and accordingly indefinitely blocked him. Aleta  Sing 12:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sock puppet case
I'm very sorry for the confusion. It was very late at night when I reported the user. I saw the similar account created, and the fishy business on the related article. So being "click-happy" I reported the user. All that's left is to see if one turns out to be a vandal. Cheers! Wiki Zorro sign 23:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

hi, you just deleted my article on 80's babies.

i don't believe this should have been deleted because it contained exclusive info about the topic which cannot be found on any other website apart from the source i actually mention in the article.

i understand tht it is short but that is because the topic is reltively new and i'm sure ill grow in time.

could you please revise your decision about it s wikipedia is the only site that would have the info. i have looked everywhere for information on the topic and out of fustration i have come to wikipedia.

thank you for your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by No.1 SuPeRsTaR (talk • contribs) 13:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Moment Theory
Assume good faith and unblock him/her; they've been duly warned about notability, etc. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC) (on his way to lunch)

BWCBadmin
With usernames like that, I'm assuming in good faith that they had no idea that was against policy. Also, they're not editing much (Someone actively editing under a username with "admin" should be blocked, of course).

Generally, we should give them a few days to respond and then block them, or, well, I was going to suggest the "temporary userpage" template but that's been deleted. Daniel Case (talk) 12:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * UPDATE: someone else already made the block. Daniel Case (talk) 12:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Faber Optimé
Two users, including jpgordon, have supported unblock on the user talk page on the grounds that this is apparently a personal Internet username, not a company, and he's not really editing promotionally. So I'm going to go ahead and do it. Just letting you know. Daniel Case (talk) 22:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Anontalk spamming
Re - there's been a few of these, it's a bot (or a "zombie PC"), so they need a goodly long block with account creation blocked. Hope that's okay. Neıl 龱  12:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've changed it to a softblock, so the collatoral damage should be very low. Neıl  龱  12:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

cisc
Man you're fast. Thanks!--NapoliRoma (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Dendodge 1
I know it doesn't require a warning, but I like to give people one so they can create a non-violating name ......<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:#008000"> Dendodge  .. Talk Help 14:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Blocked editor back on Kashmiri people article?
Take a look at -- same text, so possibly same editor that you blocked? Doug Weller (talk) 06:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Julie Hosler
Can I get the article userfied? There was no real opposition to have an article about the incident instead of the person. Let me see if I can rewrite it. Thanks, -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 21:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You mean I have no way of seeing the deleted version? -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 14:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletions
Since there is a speedy criterion for blank talk pages, blank talk pages can be deleted. I hope at least you don;t disagree with the talk pages blanking. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I thought the talk page for Nikolai_Markovich_Emanuel contained the box describing to keep the article after motion to delete it has been withrawn. Unless because of the article move (Nikolai Markovitch -> Nikolai Markovich Emanuel) this stopped being neccessary? Anyway, the talk page hasn't been orphaned. -- Muczachan (talk) 12:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I have recreated the Talk:Nikolai_Markovich_Emanuel page with msgbox about past discussion about deleting this entry. Muczachan (talk) 14:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You also reverted the simple removal of the project banners without tagging. See here -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

AN discussion regarding this
See Administrators' noticeboard. – xenocidic  ( talk ) 12:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion as well. It appears G6 applies in our case. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Majin Buu talk page
May i know why was Majin Buu talk page got deleted. Has far i know there was conversion there. --SkyWalker (talk) 14:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for late response. The talk page was restored. :). --SkyWalker (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Vietnam Awesome Travel
Any reason you can think of not to give this one the ol' spamusername block? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

disappointed
Hi, Definition of Vandalism according to wikipedia is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Please understand that I am appealling against an organized vandalism by a group of people who have a history of compromising the NPOV of the CPI(M). They take turns in deleting and blanking the page and frustating the editors. I looked into the history page and realized this has been going on for many years and a lot of editors and their edits have been removed.

Since no action has been taken against them and the victims have been penalized I suspect they may be overtly and covertly supported by some adminstrators.

All I am asking is to do is look into the history of CPI(M) and see the pattern and vandalism for yourself.

I have read many articles on Wiki and have seen that almost all articles provide space for the opposite point of view. Why is the opposite point of view getting deleted in CPI(M) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sindhian (talk • contribs) 22:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Coats of arms
Yes I do. But in the next half of hour! --ES Vic (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Dead female indonesian politicians
Have nothing on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_East_Java is that what i would have prodded and let the female politician lie in peace :) SatuSuro 01:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Anyboyd involved with that project has to be slightly wacky to cope with more issues than arbcom can find to cope with in a year :( SatuSuro 23:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation/guidance
Dear Anthony.bradury,

I've recently been involved in a prelude to an edit war *embarrassed cough* and was hoping you could help mediate between myself and User:Skoojal. I'd already approached User:BrownHairedGirl but she is on a wikibreak and things needed a speedier resolution. The article in question is Conversion therapy and the difficulties we've been having are documented on Talk:Conversion therapy, User talk:Conmalone and User talk:Skoojal.

User:Joshuajohanson has also been involved peripherally (User talk:Joshuajohanson).

The main problems are: 1) An edit I made adding a pseudoscience tag to the article: I backed up my claims with definitions and 2 sources but was rapidly reverted... I still feel it's appropriate but backed off early to avoid 3RR/edit war. 2) Edits I made to the lede to make it clearer: I'm not sure the exact reason for the complete reversion of my edits - those listed included nonsense/ridiculous/too long, etc. Maybe I'm just a bit slow today. I was trying to improve the syntax and also to clarify a previous edit which at first seemed incorrect to me but later proved correct, per interpretation of ICD-10. Skoojal thinks I'm plain wrong. 3) Edits I made to Medical Consensus paragraph text. This, I feel, is the most serious problem.  Other editors had edited out "biased" text and replaced it with text that was biased, POV, factually incorrect and misrepresentative of the sources it referenced.  I re-edited it, in as neutral a style as I could come up with, but it was reverted over and over.  I'm not sure what I did wrong or why I seem to have annoyed people - I did my best to compromise, compliment, etc.  And I referenced and quoted as much as possible.

I'd also appreciate your input on Talk:Exodus International where Skoojal posted a reply to something I'd written. I'm assuming good faith but would hate for another edit war to sprout there too.

Sorry to burden you with a relatively minor issue, but I'm not feeling comfortable with the way it's progressing and would appreciate some guidance. I'm always open to advice, constructive criticism and help, particularly if I've gone against etiquette or policy.

Thanks in advance for helping heal the rift. Conor (talk) 09:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

thankspam
I suppose you're right; it was a bit of a self-defeating nom. I had low expectations for my chances to pass. It's true that I might have passed if I'd come clean about my largely benign past, but I didn't want to go back and dig into it, and I stay true to the philosophy that adminship is no big deal - I tried, I failed, and now I'll just return to doing what I've always done. And I look forward to working with you in the future.  Mr. IP  《 Defender of Open Editing 》 14:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Puja Chatterjee
Hi Tony,

I noticed in my watchlist that you recently deleted Puja Chatterjee as an A7 non-notable bio. I don't know if it was in the article when you read it, or not, but Puja happens to be the 6th finalist on Indian Idol (season 3).

I think that this makes her notable as she definitely "has a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following" (Notability (people)).

Would you please undelete?

« D. Trebbien ( talk ) 00:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Puja Chatterjee
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Puja Chatterjee. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.


 * Please know that I mean no offense. I am asking for consensus on this because I would not feel comfortable adding to the article's content. « D. Trebbien ( talk ) 00:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article: Arabeyes
Could you please bring back the article?

Is not stagnant. There is a lot of activities behind the front webpage. The project is the main vehicle through which most OSS is translated to Arabic (including GNOME, KDE, Ubuntu, XFCE, etc)

Check the mailing lists, and the wiki. http://wiki.arabeyes.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.193.75 (talk) 11:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Note also that It wouldn't appear "notable" to you because its mainly geared towards Arab users. Pretty much any Arab Linux user had in someway interacted with the project in a direct way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.193.75 (talk) 12:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Rudolf Hess
Have you seen the Rudolf Hess article. For an such a prominent figure, the quality of the article is frankly shocking, with unreferenced guff and paragraphs all over the place. Feel like rescuing it? Davidelit (talk) 16:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Caché (chain)
you deleted this article that said it didn't have enough content to show context.

because it was a new article and a stub, isn't this to be expected? I added a link to the main site, which not only explained the article but proved it was noteworthy.

Bbqturtle (talk) 17:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

My policies on usernames
I used to be more aggressive on borderline usernames, until Rspeer got on my (ahem) case about it per WP:BITE that we should give as much benefit of doubt as possible, especially where there haven't been any edits. It's amusing, then, that someone thinks I'm now more lenient than everyone else there.

I think that any "left concern" names should be moved to the holding pen after 24 hours. Every so often, I (and I think some other admins) review the holding pen to see if any of those names have continued or resumed editing. If they haven't, we just remove them. Usually they never edit again and there's no reason to block the account, although at some point I suppose the user and talk pages should be deleted. Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Recent IP block
Hrm, I really don't know. If I set up Firefox to connect via proxy through the port I mentioned, I can access the secure version of Wikipedia via secure.wikimedia.org, but I cannot access en.wikipedia.org. Does that count as an open proxy? J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 20:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I unblocked because I could not view the login page for Gmail (which is secure) with the proxy, so I guess that the fact that I could view secure.wikimedia.org was fluke. Just FYI. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds  21:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Inflatable Icons
Hey Tony - I'll try and keep this brief. I was asked to userfy the above article that you deleted, and it most definitely no longer qualifies for the A1 under which it went. Would you object to a move back to mainspace? Feel free to reply here. Cheers, <span style="border:1px solid #20406F;padding:1px 3px;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;"> Alex Muller  22:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Blendon and Penhill (ward)
The point about the Parliamentary Constituency is that the geographical identity of there constituent parts is unique as are the geopolitical constituents and not interchangeable so that Hackney Downs and [Hackney Downs (ward) are separate and unique.

The monetary values of each ward in the capital are about £50,000,000 per annum and the value of most wiki articles is less than this.

As for the notability issue of each Councillor I concede there is less time in the day or personal commitment to detailing each and everyone and this is the reason for not following through with individual pages but political careers start with representative responsibility for millions of pounds which is important enough for me but then end up as PPC's such as Eric Ollerenshaw from Springfield (ward) or in the case of Meg Hillier MP Ex-Councilor, Ex-London Assembly Member, and now Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State but for where did she represent? Somewhere within Islington.

The point is that there are more pages of obscure footballers such as Joe Keenan (footballer) and football teams Concord Rangers F.C. (note the manager and chairman are listed) than of hugely powerful individuals that are fundamentally important to our democratic society as representatives of the smallest unit of democracy.

Maybe the issue is that I believe that some automatic notability would promote better representation and stronger democratic values such as membership of political parties, electoral participation, and not to mention participation is school, hospital, and credit union governance.

Anyway well done for being a Councillor, how many Electors have you canvassed in total? I’ve only been doing it for three years and have got up to about 15,000 but I enjoy it and prefer to avoid this machine. Jed keenan (talk) 18:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability

"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable."


 * Blendon and Penhill residents and business association
 * Conservative party events in Blendon and Penhill ward
 * Statistics
 * Councillors
 * Cllr Graham D'Amiral's Facebook listing
 * Councillors directory
 * Cllr Graham D'Amiral quoted in the Sun national newspaper

And in response, obscure football managers are listed in the articles of their obscure football team so what is the difference apart from that Councillors are democratically elected and spend our taxes and Managers have fanatics? An inner London local authority annual budget divided by each ward is £50,000,000 per ward and is slightly more notable than the spending power of a fully detailed third division team that includes a bio article such as Macclesfield Town F.C. manager Keith Alexander (footballer). It is a simple comparison of value to the thousands of Electors against the value of a few hundred football fanatics do you disagree that Keith Alexander is less notable than any one of 3,000 Councillors or directly elected Mayors in London, there are clearly less gongs and is the monarchy wrong all the time?

Me I love counting totals, a database is invaluable. Jed keenan (talk) 09:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Blendon and Penhill (ward)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Blendon and Penhill (ward). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jed keenan (talk) 14:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Dstebbins
Thanks, I've done so. ff m  20:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Japanese World War II destroyers
About 2 years ago (!) you gave some helpful comments on a WWII German destroyers article and also suggested equivalent ones for Japanese and Italian WWII destroyers. I've finally put one together for the Japanese (Japanese World War II destroyers) and I'd welcome your comments, if you have time. The subject's more complex than the German equivalent and so is the article. Folks at 137 (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


 * First, many thanks for your time and critique; another perspective is always helpful. Also, I blush from your compliment! The idea behind this series of articles (British, German & Japanese in existance; US, Italian, French, Soviet are possibilities) was to summarise a flow of development and tie together existing articles on each class along the lines of Destroyers/"nation"/"class"/"ship", where "nation" represents the development flow in each nation. It also gave me a structure within which to fulfil my own curiosity which would allow an overview approach. The article on Malta Convoys started in this way. Wiki has to satisfy casual or non-specialist curiosity as well as provide a specialist's reference point and this is not always easy to do, IMO. The German article has kept this broad-brush approach, largely due to the subject but the British one was extended by other editors in various ways and these were incorporated into the Japanese one. The danger is that the article becomes too bulky in a chase for improved quality ratings (particularly when it's so subjective - one ed rated it "B", another "start" or a bare "C"). The additional detail that you suggest is easily added, with citations, but I'm wary of adding detail that belongs elsewhere in the class or ship articles - or campaign or battle ones. The Japanese story is already more complex and interesting than the other two. Comments? Thanks again. Folks at 137 (talk) 17:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
Hi, I and my fellow editors are facing a deadlock on a issue of removing/toning down a section as subsection under criticism section in Operation Blue Star article, concerns include WP:NPOV, the summary of dispute can be found at, please let us know your views/opinion so that 'alleged' bias may be looked into and a consensual solution may be found. Thanks LegalEagle (talk) 06:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

User requests to be unblocked
But didn't put it in the unblock template. I thought you'd be interested since you blocked him in the first place. Thanks and have a nice day! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

username blocks
Hey, would you be able to take a look at User:Being blocked is better than being "not notable"? For some reason the UAA reporting isn't working for him, not sure if it is due to the quotation marks. Ironholds (talk) 09:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed I was; it seemed highly likely. Not really a need to bother with CU, though; a lot of fuss for people not (currently) actively disruptive. Ironholds (talk) 09:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

recent block
Thank you for taking the time to look at my user page. Although 3 admins supported the block you made, none of them actually read what i had typed to dispute the block. And as much as i appreciate your hard work, which i can, i feel that i wasnt even given a chance. If you look at the accuser who reported me, I was given one warning and between giving him a barnstar i was reported. So i didnt know how to deal with vandals, but i do now, and so i experimented on my own user page, but at least I was making an effort to improve afterwards. I recieved one warning that was it, I changed the editing ways and then i get blocked. I still felt like as a new comer I was bitten. Anyway I thought you should know how I was made to feel. It seems very apparent to me that people are to quick to judge someone without even reading what they type or even looking at what they say, they just trust the one admin before the other. I at least made an effort to contest the block and had a willingness to improve.

And for the query which you and some others may have noted on other talk pages (and my own), templates can be easily found just by searching them in the search box, using them correctly takes time and encouragement. And they arent too hard to figure out. Anyway Its doubtful ill continue to edit. Maybe some other time. Happydude 69ya (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Early "battleships" (or not)
Hi Tony.

If memory serves, you did a lot of work on the various pre-dreadnought battleship articles a year or two ago; I wonder if you'd be able to provide some advice?

There's a discussion here on how to describe the Cerberus-class ships from the 1870s - were they early battleships, breastwork monitors, or something else entirely? How did contemporary sources describe them?

I've no idea, but it rang a bell and it seemed you might well be the chap to ask. Thanks for any advice! Shimgray | talk | 12:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Shimgray | talk | 19:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of ЖЖ
Hi there. Hi had created the page ЖЖ, as a redirect to LiveJournal, on the grounds that ЖЖ, as per Livejournal (Sale to SUP), is the "Russian translation of LiveJournal", standing for "Живой Журнал", and "has become a genericized trademark for blogging in general". The article also exists in the Russian Wikipedia (ЖЖ). I think this deletion deserves some reconsidering, but of course you have the last word. Cheers, Rotring (talk) 14:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ehem
and sort of contradicts each other ;) Finn Rindahl (talk) 12:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Posting within seconds on User talk:BerkIsRussian
Hi. I note you posted a warning on the above page, while I was placing an indef block template there. My view is that this one issue poster is not going to contribute usefully now they are unable to place their article in the encyclopedia, so I removed the temptation of vandalising via the account (I also considered the comments on the other editors talkpage to be so inappropriate that a warning was not required). You may disagree, and you may wish to remove or vary the block, or you might wish to remove your warning. I am content for you to do as you wish (including nowt). Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Re-creating the Michael Tan article
Hi. I would like to create an article for Filipino Medical Anthropologist and Newspaper Columnist Michael Tan, and I intend to use his bio from his book "Revisiting Usog,Pasma, Kulam." He is, by virtue of his column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, probably the Philippines' most popular living anthropologist, so I really think he merits an article. However, I noticed you had already previously deleted a Michael Tan article, for lack of references. So I'd like to get a nod from you first before I make a stub for him. (The Bio only gives enough material for a stub, I'm afraid, and I'll be scouring Mr Tan's columns for autobiographical notes.) Shall I proceed? Thanks. -- Alternativity (talk) 08:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Aksdsdvdsbvidasgjiasgjiasg
I just noticed User talk:Aksdsdvdsbvidasgjiasgjiasg as he touched one of my wathclisted articles. The edit was legit, so I went to ask for a name change and found you had done so over two weeks ago. The user has not responded nor has the name been changed. I'm inclined to give a stern warning and allow very short limit for name change before a username block as the user is active now and will hopefully respond. I thought it best to ask your opinion as you had already started the process, before I softblock the name. -- Alexf(talk) 12:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed this is being already discussed at RFC. Disregard the note then, will continue there. -- Alexf(talk) 17:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of H S Phoolka
Hi H S Phoolka article has been deleted and I see your last edit/deletion of the article and cannot find any other information like AFD debate etc. Can you please point me to the AFD debate if it took place, or if there is any other information that can help me see why and who nominated the article for deletion and why it was deleted. H S Phoolka worked as senior Advocate of Delhi High Court and is known for this long and ongoing struggle to get justice for the widows and victims of 1984 Anti-Sikh massacre, he has headed notable orgranizations and has written book a well. I can find more notable information on him but will still need the reason for the deletion of the article. Regards, --<em style="font-family:pristina;color:;font-size:16px">Road <em style="font-family:pristina;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">Ahead  <em style="color:">=Discuss= 17:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, never mind about this. I got my answers from the deletion nominator's message on other user's talkpage. --<em style="font-family:pristina;color:;font-size:16px">Road <em style="font-family:pristina;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">Ahead  <em style="color:">=Discuss= 19:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "I understand that you have perhaps received answers to your questions regarding this article, but just to confirm, the article was nominated for deletion by Closedmouth, and I deleted it on the basis that the article did not demonstrate any encyclopaedic notability. There may indeed be significant notability attached to the gentleman in question, but this has to be contained within the article. I am happy to restore the article as and when you are ready to expand it; let me know. --Anthony.bradbury'talk' 21:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)"

No worries, I have used this opportunity to correct the name of the article from H S Phoolka to H. S. Phoolka and have already added preliminary text. I'll review, edit, format and seek feedback as we progress with the article and you can review the content too. Regards, --<em style="font-family:pristina;color:;font-size:16px">Road <em style="font-family:pristina;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">Ahead  <em style="color:">=Discuss= 22:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: RfA
Nope, I'm not going anywhere, still editing and doing adminny/arbcom stuff. Just not bothering with RfA anymore, which wasn't too big a time commitment at least. Wizardman 04:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

AIV question
Why did you call my WP:AIV report "vandalism"? This came up on WP:ANI and I was trying to be a little pro-active. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No hay problema. I just wanted to be sure what was going on. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I goofed
re: new article M. Keaton / Author M. Keaton.

Dear Mr. Bradbury. I was recently trying to help by patrolling the backlog of new pages, and came across a page that was listed as: M. Keaton. I did a move, and request to delete the redirect (which you did promptly). I then started attempting to do a little research on said person, only to realize that "Author" is his profession, not a first name. I haven't yet found the full name of the author in question as (s)he appears to go by simply M. Keaton. The bottom line is I believe I was in error in moving the page, and rather than start an endless loop of mistakes in trying to repair the error, I'm asking you what steps I should now take. My apologies for the error and increased work it's caused, and I'll be more cautious in the future. Thank you for any suggestions you might have. Ched (talk) 18:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:
Because for one reason or another someone can not create an account and the request an account by Account Creation Assistance and since i have Account creator as a permission i can make one for them. Sincerely, <em style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting;color:White;background:red">Hereford 22:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I've extended his block to two weeks from now for changing your edit declining an unblock. Not exactly a nice person, the accusations you were lying were bad enough. dougweller (talk) 08:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Usernames for admin attention
I am trying to comment on a bot-reported name (dts illuminazione) but cannot - when I try to edit the section, it does not appear in the edit screen. DuncanHill (talk) 15:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * And now the entry has disappeared completely. DuncanHill (talk) 15:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Expired prods
Hello Anthony, when you delete the expired prods could you please remember to include the reason given by the prodder on the prod template. Thanking you, RMHED (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Tenzin Tsering
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tenzin Tsering. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Power.corrupts (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

3RR rules
Hi,

About yesterday, I was not trying to get unblocked. I was simply pointing out that different grades of irregularity should be punished accordingly. Otherwise, by not punishing accordingly, one’s disruptive behavior will be encouraged, as was the case of User:Baxter9. It’s a matter of principle.--Bluehunt (talk) 14:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Connorfreakyfrea
I indef'd him only minutes after you left a warning, as it was obvious this was a copyviolating SPA. I think this is a Primetime sock as well. Blueboy96 19:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

User:87.198.192.181
Hi Anthony,

I've already warned this user repeatedly. If you look at his edit history, he's been doing this for the better part of 8 months now on various articles from the Battle of Zama, to the Easter Uprising, to the Battle of Berlin. I requested a block on the admin page, but the other admins didn't review the contents of his edits. Can you just get it over and block him for a little while? Chasing this guy's sneaky vandalism can be a hassle. Farkeld (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA thankspam
Denbot (talk) 22:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Tempo Magazine
Yes, WP:CONFLICT. I'm trying to be good :-) Davidelit (talk) 07:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Wired for Books

 * Just this week, our author interviews at Wired for Books were used in online content by the The Guardian of London, http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/audioslideshow/2009/jan/29/johnupdike, and also by The World, a production of Public Radio International. I sorely wish that the Wikipedia editors who claim our external links are "spam" or "vandalism" had, at least, a rudimentary understanding of American literature or the patience and intelligence to take five minutes and check out our web site at http://wiredforbooks.org . Reckless and ignorant editors have done much damage to the Wikipedia project and this is a good example of that recklessness.


 * Our external links have been a major part of Wikipedia in past years, yet we continue to find hundreds of our links to audio interviews disabled. Many of these authors have won the Pulitzer Prize in Literature, several have won the Nobel Prize in Literature. Many, many thousands of Wikipedia users have followed these external links and listened to the content at Wired for Books.


 * Please stop disabling and deleting our content. Thank you.

Scribe711 (talk) 18:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC)scribe711 David Kurz kurz@ohio.edu WOUB Center for Public Media at Ohio University

Anthony, I received this insulting message on my talk page as well. You seem to agree that this fellow is spamming. It's obvious in so many ways that he's not even trying to learn WP-policies, like not signing his posts. I'm no administrator, but I think he deserves a block. Of course, if he was really interested in contributing and not in advertising his agenda, he'd include the content into the articles. His behavior doesn't make me inclined to research if the interviews would be useful to the articles I edit (like Maya Angelou and some of her related articles). I did that for a BBC interview someone had brought to my attention, and it proved to be very helpful. I'll let you try and explain that to him; perhaps he'll hear it if it came from an admin like you. If you need assistance, let me know. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Auschwitz concentration camp
I'd be happy to go through and tag points I thought needed citations. I was initially hesitant to do so for fear it would be viewed as casting doubt on the facts themselves and I didn't want to convey that idea. I noted there were quite a number of cites for the article, but some sections have a much larger number than others. The section covering the variety of estimates of numbers dead has 26, over 1/3, with other sections having one cite. That isn't to imply the cites aren't important where they are, just that other parts probably need more support. I'll tag the points that I think would benefit from citation. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I certainly do understand, I have an article or two I feel that about myself (making no comparison whatsoever, Charles Manson is one of them) and I tend to take exception when someone criticizes something in it, though oddly enough, that rarely happens. I didn't want my tag to imply criticism either. Mostly what I noted were numbers and references to studies without cites. The article itself is quite good, it has much better detail than the majority of concentration camp articles I've looked at the last few days. I'm not sure what sparked my desire to look at them, unless it was through one of those treasure hunts of links one goes through after reading some more obscure article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 11:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)