User talk:Cirt/Archive 17

Userfy request
I would like to move the contents of the deleted page International Random Film festival to User:Colincbn/International_Random_Film_festival in the hopes it will someday become notable enough to include. However I am not sure of the proper etiquette when userfying pages. Note: I voted for deletion because it obviously fails WP:N at this time, and I had no connection to the article until after the AfD began. Colincbn (talk) 06:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Colincbn/International Random Film Festival. -- Cirt (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Outcome of Articles for deletion/Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series
As the closing administrator in Articles for deletion/Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series, you decided that there was no consensus between merging the article or deleting it. Keeping the article was not supported even if there was no consensus. The outcome, however, appears to have caused some controversy as you can see here, because the article was not !voted to be kept, but it is being kept because the outcome was no consensus. Per WP:BOLD, I want to do something similar to what Shooterwalker did, only that I would merge all the content from Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series into Foundation series in a section called Fictional timeline while adding tags about its content such as in-universe and unreferenced. I would like to know if this action would be in accordance with your closure, because I'd rather merge the content like this and replace Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series with a redirect than leave the article around while a merge discussion takes place. In my experience, merge discussion rarely advance when editors aren't interested in the topic and I believe that discussing the merge will only stall the actual merge and will allow the article Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series to be kept even though that was not supported in the AfD. Jfgslo (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I suggest a content based RFC to take place at the talk page, to assess community consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 18:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * At the talk page of Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series or Foundation series? Also, I'm a little confused, could you give me an example of what you mean with content based? Jfgslo (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * At the talk page of the 1st one, and please read WP:RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I read about RfC. What I'm confused with content based is the sense in which you used it. That is, as I understood it originally, I would place this same question in the RfC (whether merging the whole timeline is supported by the AfD outcome in the terms that I expressed above), but, when I re-read content based, I thought that you perhaps meant that it should be a different type of question. Jfgslo (talk) 19:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing significant, just that it would be an RFC that concerns the content of the page, as opposed to, say, for example, behavior of individuals in editing that selfsame page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I think that the outcome of this AfD should be "redirect, no consensus between deleting or merging", not simply no consensus. You should review the outcome of WT:Articles for deletion/Archive 61, which differed from. There are now two merge discussions: Talk:Foundation series and Talk:Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series. Flatscan (talk) 04:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably the one that is in the format of an RFC should be the main discussion, not the other one. -- Cirt (talk) 04:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ratko Mladić
Looking at the history of that article, I'm seeing large numbers of constructive IP edits, and little vandalism. Could you perhaps reconsider your protection, or point me to the disruption you saw? The RFPP seemed only to cite hypothetical problems. Thanks, Prodego  talk 18:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, dropped down to only one day of semi. -- Cirt (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Is even that necessary? Prodego  talk 18:45, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, just wait 24 hours and it will be done and over. -- Cirt (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Dan Savage
Hey Cirt - you're always one of those people I'm glad to still see around the Wiki. This was a good read. Haha - I'm glad you included this bit because it gave me a laugh: Savage stated to Keck that he could contribute a weekly advice column with the recommended title of "Hey, Faggot", and this was later modified to become "Savage Love". I still think "Hey, Faggot" would make a good sex/relationship advice column - I'm surprised nobody's snapped that one up. -- David  Shankbone  22:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the kind words about my new article creation on Wikipedia. I really appreciate it. A lot. Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 23:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Meh - you don't get thanked enough for your contributions, but who on the wiki does, right? -- David  Shankbone  01:36, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed ... -- Cirt (talk) 01:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Sadads (talk) 22:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 23:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Skipping Towards Gomorrah
Nice work! Good to see an article get expanded like that. No big changes, I added a minor clause, just wanted to say thanks and keep it up. Meelar (talk) 23:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Meelar, for the very kind words about my attempts to improve the quality of an article about a book on Wikipedia. Thank you very much. I really appreciate that. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Terry (Fawlty Towers)
Hey Cirt, can you userfy this for me? I have a book from the library now. Best if I don't use admin actions myself on articles I am involved with. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Casliber/Terry (Fawlty Towers). -- Cirt (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks! Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Thomas Erl
Hi Cirt, I just want to know whether a publisher such as Prentice Hall can be considered as reliable source for showing the work of an author? A page on Prentice Hall SO Computing shows the books authored by Thomas Erl and his books were one of the highest rated on Amazon. The link is not owned by the author and hence can be considered an external source. Your inputs will be helpful. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 03:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * More secondary sources than just the one would be more appropriate. -- Cirt (talk) 04:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, an interview with Thomas can be found at Interview and Book Expert. His latest article is on MSDN Magazine. Most of his past articles or interview are present on SOA World Magazine. Also he is contibuting author of SOA Manifesto. Currently he is part of a committee involved in creating SOA Maturity Model. My goal is to contribute the right information to wikipedia and any inputs, comments from admins like you is going to help me in improving the content. Appreciate your help. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 08:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to userfy the article for you, so you can work on it in a subpage of your userspace, to attempt to demonstrate notability. -- Cirt (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, the article was restored on 25th and it was mentioned that I had 7 days to update and put my points. In that case, can I have the article restored so that I can edit it with more appropriate content. After a week, it could be reviewed again and then we can decide whether to keep it in main space or user namespace. Thanks. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 09:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

✅, now at User:Edited by Sanjay/Thomas Erl. You can work on it there. -- Cirt (talk) 09:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, I wanted the article to be moved to main namespace (as it was restored on 25th) so that I can work on it for 7 days on the main page and if still there would be any issue, it can be moved to user namespace. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 09:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Jonathan Stephen
I was wondering if you could explain why you deleted this article and said there was consensus when the clearest I could see was an even split in commenting editors. I might also note that at least one editor who has previously said "delete" changed their mind after seeing the additional sources. Where was the consensus clear? To me there were enough sources for this to meet WP:Notability, therefore what criteria were you going off of in this decision? I would have thought at the very least that the "rosh yeshiva" argument noted by Agricola would be enough to keep Stephen, not to mention the numerous references which were updated by other editors. Fountainviewkid 10:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I am equally puzzled by this deletion, especially by your assertion that "Consensus was clear." I contributed heavily to both the article and the discussion and continue to think that the head of an institution (a Bible College) that has been granting the PhD, and Dr. of Divinity degree for decades and that continues to confer doctorates ever year to students who come to study here from other countries is WP:N by definition.  Many graduate schools are small.  That does not make them influential or their heads not notable.   But back to the idea that "Consensus was clear."   There were six editors arguing to keep the article.  Six arguing that it should be deleted and one User:Coyets who voted delete, then returned to the page to change his vote to keep.  He was unusual in this debate in not regularly editing articles on Christian topics.  In this regard, it is worth noting that among the editors arguing strongly for deletion was one User:Hrafn who has also repeatedly tagged the school that Jonathan Stephen heads, the Wales Evangelical School of Theology for deletion , and who recently wasted the time of a lot of editors arguing for the deletion of College Church here ; as the next editor to work on the page noted, that "article was rescued from a pointless deletion" .  That "pointless" AFD was started by an editor User:BelloWello who was recently blocked indefinitely, then allowed to resume editing despite a record of disruptive behavior, foul language, personal attacks on other editors and sock puppetry. I suppose there were reasons for unblocking him, but I cannot have much respect for his opinions.   I think that deleting this article is a waste of useful information on a notable Christian leader.  It also reinforces the view that is now widespread in the Christian community that Wikipedia is dominated by aggressively anti-Christian editors.  The proper action would be to reinstate the article and hang a needs improvement tag.I.Casaubon (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * For your convenience, here is the changed vote by User:Coyets "I have removed my 'delete' opinion because of the various references listed by Fountainviewkid, the reference from the Bible League Trust certainly displays third party coverage of the subject, but the other references which are not merely trivial mentions are from religious organisations which I find difficult to tell whether they are third party sources or not. However, the Wales Online and Evangelical Times references from I:Casaubon also seem to be third party coverage confirming the subject's notability. Unfortunately, I could not find an interview on the BBC, and the BBC's inclusion of the subject on a panel for a talk show does not confirm or deny notability. However, the Get Surrey reports are on the subject's campaign to free Ian Stillman, and that, together with the other references I have mentioned, probably amounts to just enough notability for an article. Coyets (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC)"

There was consensus at Articles for deletion/Jonathan Stephen for deletion. However, I would be most willing to userfy to someone's userspace subpage, so you can work on it further with the possibility of maybe satisfying WP:NOTE through improvements to the page - if someone wishes to request me to do that. -- Cirt (talk) 16:27, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I beg your pardon, but how was there a consensus? There seems to me to be a clear division of opinion leaning slightly towards keep.  I think the article should be restored to main space, in the hope that someone more closely involved in the British  evangelical world will come upon and improve it.I.Casaubon (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you refusing my offer to provide the article for you in userspace in someone's userspace subpage? -- Cirt (talk) 17:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am asking how you understand the discussion as having reaches consensus. I.Casaubon (talk) 17:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am sorry you did not like the outcome of the assessed consensus. But that is not a reason to outright refuse to be given an opportunity to work on the quality of the material, before it returns to article mainspace. -- Cirt (talk) 17:33, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If would be helpful if the deleting editor could actually demonstrate some evidence of consensus rather than evade the question. All we ask is some evidence of a "consensus". It looks possible that this was done under less than satisfactory terms. Fountainviewkid 17:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It was not the strongest consensus, but a weak consensus to delete. But I do not wish to have my talk page as a forum for re-arguing the AFD. Please take the offer to improve the page in userspace. If it looks satisfactory, we can even move it back to mainspace soon. -- Cirt (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw the discussion, and consensus was clearly for deletion. What we had on one side was the usual "I like it" arguments outnumbered by those who evaluated it against our notability policies and supported deletion. Instead of arguing about deletion, create an article that would survive deletion, if possible. b W 17:43, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, with respect, having reviewed the discussion, I didn't see any "keep" arguments based on "I like it" - they generally were suggesting that the subject is notable. I'd also suggest that a "weak consensus" is actually "no consensus". Sidefall (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, I.Casaubon is asking you how you reached your decision. To allow him to understand how you weighed the various arguments, would you append an extended closing rationale at Articles for deletion/Jonathan Stephen? Would you explain how you analyzed the policies and guidelines referenced in the discussion and the strengths/weaknesses of the "keep" and "delete" rationales. At the end of the AfD, I.Casaubon wrote: "I have just added four Korean newspaper accounts, all from google news in 2011." These sources were not rebutted by the "delete" side. Because the sources had already been added to the article at the time of the close, I.Casaubon is wondering why the article should be userfied. The article, in his opinion, has been sufficiently sourced by at least four additional reliable sources. This opinion has yet to be countered. Cunard (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. I restored the page. I relisted it. It is back at AFD for more discussion. Another admin can close it later. Have fun. -- Cirt (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

THANKS! That was rather honorable. Fountainviewkid 17:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. Thank you for stating so. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Cirt, for relisting the page. I will contact some users who can read Korean to assess the reliability and depth of the sources. Cunard (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Cirt. And Thank you Cunard for contacting Koreans.  I used the same opaque (to non-Korean speakers) pages at Wales Evangelical School of Theology and would like to have both pages be accurate.I.Casaubon (talk) 17:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

As someone who has contributed to the article and the AfD discussion, I was concerned by your deletion of it. I've just reviewed the discussion and the votes appear to be split approx 50/50, which I would describe as "no consensus", a view which others share. I note that you haven't offered any evidence to argue otherwise. I'd respectfully suggest that your deletion was unjustified and I'm pleased that you've reversed it. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on these matters, but I think deleting an article where there is no clear consensus to do so is against policy and, I'd respectfully ask that you refrain from such actions in the future. Thanks. Sidefall (talk) 07:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Swamp Thing Set
Would you mind adding a comment to Articles for deletion/The Swamp Thing Set with some additional information about why it was relisted, what you saw missing from the discussion?--RadioFan (talk) 11:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅! -- Cirt (talk) 16:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I think we are close, prehaps participants just need to clarify their positions.  Please consider closing it after things are clearer rather than wait another week.--RadioFan (talk) 17:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Armando Vajushi
Cirt good morning, can you please explain this deletion? I clearly explained how he satisfies NFOOTY, and I also tried to bring sources that he satisfies GNG. What else should one do to avoid these deletions that go against wiki policies? Phil Bridger's comment was on the weakness of NFOOTY. Does that mean that we should disregard it now, since it's weak? --Doktor Plumbi (talk) 11:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus was determined at Articles for deletion/Armando Vajushi to delete. However, I would be most willing to userfy the article for you, within a subpage of your userspace so you can work on it further to demonstrate WP:NOTE - if you so request it. -- Cirt (talk) 16:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Please do and let me know. There are sources on him every day.--Doktor Plumbi (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

✅, now at User:Doktor Plumbi/Armando Vajushi. -- Cirt (talk) 05:16, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Wow, thank you! :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Harmon Leon Wikipedia Page
Can I find out why the wikipedia page for Harmon Leon was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harmonleon (talk • contribs) 18:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:AFD, it was deleted after discussion at Articles for deletion/Harmon Leon. -- Cirt (talk) 18:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Flygrossing
Mr. Cirt,

You have just deleted a wikipedia page about Flygrossing. What is sad for me is the fact that rather than being an international portal of information, as the Internet should be, with different languages..... The fact that some editors could not read the articles in common european languages like Italian or some other languages, like Russian and Estonian, is being ignored. Yet - true, Fly grossing is a new "subject" but the whole idea was to help more people have access to this information world wide and share with them a new "creation" development. Still......on Wikipedia I can find lots of words of vulgarism, is it because there are more articles about it?

Sorry - for writing it to you like that - and I do respect your point of view and wikipedia is highly regarded as a source of information. As such - I did not expect it to be deleted. Ranarthurbraun (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I would be more than happy to userfy the article for you, so you can work on it in a subpage of your userspace, to attempt to demonstrate notability. -- Cirt (talk) 05:15, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

You may be interested in this AFD
List of Bratz products is up for its second deletion nomination here. You took part in the first one so I thought you might be interested. Ryan Vesey (talk) 03:15, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like it closed, as delete. -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you
I will never bother you again, sorry. Toddst1 told me to contact you if he was not available, but I guess I made a boo-boo. :-( --Skol fir (talk) 06:22, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Redirects and deletions
Hi Cirt,

After AfD discussions, you deleted two articles, Faded horizon and James Craig Author. During the AfD discussion, each article was also redirected by other editors. Could you please also delete the final destination articles, Faded Horizon ‎and James Craig (author)‎? Thanks, WWGB (talk) 07:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 07:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

special request
You added semiprotection to Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa. I have looked to find the specific request made, but can not find an archive availability on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. In any case, there were no violations of any substantial WP policy, the reasons given by Tenebrae on Talk:Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa are all false: 1) CN insertions were removed because the citations were already there, in the article text. The talk page and hidden text pointed this out. 2)His claim of an unsourced fact is simply false, he didn’t look at the reference given, and he was uncivil in attacking the IP editor who had referenced it.

I don’t care and am not requesting unprotection of this page, but your action in approving the protection is being cited by Tenebrae as validation of his claims, and he has escalated this dispute. Tenebrae clearly has a bias against IP editors, and the revision history shows vandalism, as defined by WP; I will be documenting this.

Could you please carefully consult Talk:Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa and the revision history and re-evaluate your decision to protect? Boringbob4wk (talk) 13:19, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you've been dragged into this, but Boringbob4wk charges are uncivi and untrue. According to two admins at the Wiki Etiquette thread at Wikiquette alerts, he has made slanderous and unwarranted accusations of vandalism against me, and compounds this by making a highly personal claim of bias. As you know, I gave a descriptive list of the types of non-guideline, non-format, promotional-tone things that the anon IP was doing. I honestly suspect he and anon IP are one and the same, and will be making my case at Sockpuppet Investigations.


 * This editor has gone so far as to slander me on another editor's page, here. I am hoping the Wiki Etiquette-alert editors will have a word with him. With thanks for your understanding, --Tenebrae (talk) 17:46, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Crit, as a heads up: See Wikiquette alerts as it's fresh background to this. - J Greb (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Crit, as a heads up: See Wikiquette alerts as it's fresh background to this. - J Greb (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Seems like a matter for WP:RFPP, or WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not mean to attack or malign anyone in my above request, and did not slander anyone at the editor’s page to whom I was trying to be courteous because I had been unable to save their edits. I did not anticipate this malicious harassment and false information given to admins. How will RFPP stop that? ANI seems inapplicable as it is about repeat violators; I thought I was following policy by making a warning so it wouldn’t happen again. Right now I am simply looking for information. I assumed that a routine request for protection was not given much time or thought, but a certain other party is claiming you made a thorough evaluation. Note that I am not implying here that false statements that might have been made in the request you handled were not in good faith, I am simply asking whether you considered the statements you received as to veracity. (I examined very carefully the criterion for vandalization, and that which occurred  at 14:41, 26 May 2011, deletion based on identity of prior editor, was not in good faith and will be addressed at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts  when I am granted access and have time.)
 * 1. Is there a way to retrieve archived completed requests for protection?
 * 2. When you acted, did you consider that the comment “adding personal details that DO NOT appear in the cited source” was because he looked at a different source, not the reference given?
 * 3. When you acted, did you consult the talk page and note that “guideline violations” that might have been mentioned were the removal of “citation needed” when the citation was already present, and the refusal to allow a citation to remain as a reference for a fact for which it was not a reference, and other trivial things?
 * I simply want these answers, if you could. 69.72.27.107 (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for NPOV review
Note: Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard. -- Cirt (talk) 18:19, 28 May 2011 (UTC) -- Cirt (talk) 21:00, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Specific notices to WikiProject talkpages, subsets from above list:
 * 1) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics
 * 2) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States
 * 3) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film
 * 4) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York
 * 5) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California
 * 6) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government
 * 7) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies
 * 8) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies
 * 9) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam
 * 10) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion

Small favour
Dear Cirt, I really admire your work on books and FAs. I am trying to work on the redlinks that you added at Madonna (book) which you reviewed. I just wanted your opinion on "Born This Way (song)". I have worked on it for long. What do you think are its chances in GA and maybe later FAC? Would you also like to copy-edit it if you have free time? Thanks, — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 07:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Would you mind just copy-editing it a bit when you get time? — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 07:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Umm, okay. Time for a little secret. :) I used to work for Billboard and I have actually met him in one of Billboard's parties. We actually talked about this. A very funny man in real life, contrary to popular belief. It swonderful what you are doing with his work. Love is actually my favourite. :) — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 07:17, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. If you are stuck anywhere, please holla! I'm good at finding sources from printed media. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 07:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Noted. I will look in the library and keep you updated. :) — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 07:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow, great work. Hey I was wondering if you would like Nielsen BookScan info for the actual selling of the books. They are published in their year-end articles on books by The New York Times. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 09:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Umm, you have ten hands or something? Lol, I will give you some stuff I found. Just gimme some minutes. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 05:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

For It Gets Better: Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying, and Creating a Life Worth Living These are about this book. Hope you find them useful. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Miami Herald: Steve Rothaus Sex columnist Dan Savage reaches out to gay youth. p. 2. May 25, 2011. "Talks about impact on the homosexual community. 'He talks past all the bull and gets to the point. That’s why people listen to him,” says Brandon Campbell, a gay 18-year-old from Kendall who heard Savage at FIU. It’s inspiring. It’s about time. With all the media and society that looks down on this community …we need someone to tell everyone it gets better. Savage launched his campaign last fall after Justin Aaberg, 15, hanged himself in Minnesota and Billy Lucas, also 15, hanged himself two months later in Indiana. I was just stewing on the kids, and the reaction you always have as a gay adult is ‘I wish I could have talked to that kid,’ to have been able to tell him it gets better. When a 15-year-old or a 13-year-old kills himself because he is gay, what he’s saying is that he can’t picture a future with enough joy in it to compensate for the pain he’s in now, to make enduring this and getting through it worth it."
 * The Atlantic: Sady Doyle, October 7, 2010, Impact on gay teens
 * Delaware News: Talking about how a bullied teenager graduated and found inspiration in the book
 * News 8: Jennifer Bixler, March 31, 2011. "Support cuts suicide risk in GLB teens"
 * The New York Times:
 * No problem. I will keep you posted as soon as I find them. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Request
I'm requesting you un-lock, or at least just Semi-protect Template:Williams Street, as there has been no real extensive vandalism or issues with it.

Grapesoda22 (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 00:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Grapesoda22 (talk) 01:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 01:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Need advice before I get really angry...
I am in a dispute with. He is driving me nuts with his stupid behaviour. He started yesterday with editing on WP, good enough to start immediately with an editwar and 24 hours block. Now he is back and haunting me over a rude remark (polite version: I told him to start using his brain) that was already removed by another admin. I gave him advice over how to sign his edits on talkpages (no effect), over the mentoring project (no effect) and to read the information in the welcoming template (plain refused). He is getting under my skin... Effected pages:
 * Revision history of Columbidae: 9 reverts, no discussion
 * Revision history of User talk:Night of the Big Wind
 * Revision history of User talk:Icex15
 * User contributions ICex15

By now I get the idea that is a plain vandal or worse, a troll. This goes straight out of hand, so I need your help/advice. Please! Night of the Big Wind (talk) 02:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you might start with WP:Wikiquette alerts, or WP:THIRD. -- Cirt (talk) 02:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I will try the first one. Thanks for the advice. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 02:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 02:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yellow-crowned Bishop
Tks for the review at DYK of this. Someone proposed an alt, can you take a look? Tks. BarkingMoon (talk) 10:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
As you blocked main account, just wanted to let you know. WhiteWriter speaks 15:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Note to self, Macwhiz analysis
followed by. -- Cirt (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Protection question
Really? That doesn't seem extreme enough to require protection to me? I'm sort of surprised that with only three edits in the last three days, you felt like that needed to be protected. I'm not asking you to change it, but wondering if I'm out of calibration with the community on this. - <span style="font-family: Papyrus, sans-serif"> Philippe 16:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, dropped down to one day of semi, we'll try that and see how it goes for now. -- Cirt (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Question
I just had a quick question, I didn't really know were to ask it, so I asked here. Let's Fish is a stand-alone pilot, which was intended to be a series, but wasn't picked up. Let's Fish is also an English-language American comedy, which features a strong mixture of live action and animation.

Would it properly fit into the following categories, even though it ended up just being a pilot and not a full "series"?

Category:English-language television series, Category:American comedy television series, Category:Television series with live action and animation

If this was the wrong place to ask, then please tell were should I ask. Grapesoda22 (talk) 18:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You could best ask at WT:TV. -- Cirt (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks again, Cirt Grapesoda22 (talk) 22:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

MoviesPlanet deletion
Hello, I wrote the moviesplanet article and was amazed to see it was deleted. I added to the MP article several third party sources and I don't understand what was wrong with my article. I want to subbmit it again, please let me know what can I do to make it better (I admit, I'm a newbie, so am more than welcomed to get tips). Thanks. Orlydumitrescu (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 07:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I would love to! Orlydumitrescu (talk) 07:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Orlydumitrescu/Moviesplanet. -- Cirt (talk) 07:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Hey sorry I missed the sales for this one. Here's it: Hope this helps. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 13:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! I have incorporated this into the article. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 03:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for keeping us from having to wear helmets
Sorry if you object to what some term "the orange bar of death" but I just wanted to take a moment to express my sincere appreciation for your work at RFPP and elsewhere too, of course. I have nothing but respect for contributors who keep the substantial infrastructure here from crashing down around the heads of the rest of us. I'm grateful; thank you. – OhioStandard  (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're most welcome! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hugo Austin
Hey Cirt. I noticed the article 'Hugo Austin' has been deleted recently. I have a odd request, is it possible you could get me the text that was present so I can place it in a sandbox. The character was notable but just needed a lot more effort putting into it. It had something useful there already I think. Rain the 1  BAM 00:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Raintheone/Hugo Austin. -- Cirt (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. :) Rain the 1  BAM 12:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep me posted regarding improvements if you are thinking about proposing it go back into article mainspace. :) -- Cirt (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
The protection is appreciated. I had to do a bit of fiddling around with that article and Dipendra of Nepal because of vandalism. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 19:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Jeopardy! international tournaments AfD
Cirt, I think a merge or relist outcome was probably best here. One of the deletion arguments is apparently wrong (and frankly irrelevant as a former participant writing an book on a topic doesn't make that book lack independence) and I think the others might be read as being much less relevant in the face of actual sourcing. Thoughts? Hobit (talk) 02:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. Restored, relisted, back at AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 03:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks.Hobit (talk) 03:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Scaoch
Dear Cirt,

I think deleting the article Scoach was not necessary at this stage as improvements have been made on a going basis. Rather than deleting it I would appreciate your input for improvements or deletion of parts that you deemed wrong.

Regards. Lefa1992 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefa1992 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Jonathan Keltz
You were the deleting admin on February 2, 2010 of the article Jonathan Keltz. It was a good deletion. The article was recreated January 2011 as a two-sentence unsourced stub and was quickly A7 speedied. No problem with that either, as its author did nothing but write two meagre sentences. But 15 months have gone by and the actor's career has not stood still. He has now completed major roles in three more major productions to now meet WP:ENT, and has the coverage that he lacked back then to now meet WP:GNG. As I wish to return a far improved version to mainspace, I invite you to visit my new and improved version at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Jonathan Keltz, and perhaps offer your blessing at User talk:MichaelQSchmidt/Jonathan Keltz. Thanks,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Just wished to re-affirm that the original deletion 15 months ago was a good one, and to get your approval for a return of an improved article. Thank you and best regards,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Edits 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack
My recent edits to the 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack article were meant in good faith. I did not realize that we had to cite sources showing how the previous version of the article was inaccurate. I've started a talk page discussion. Polyquest (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I see the talk page discussion, and I am participating there, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

A quick FYI...
relative to a block you made 2011060210013923. Cheers, -- Jezebel's  Ponyo bons mots 19:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears an appropriate response was given to the individual. -- Cirt (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Unblock request was declined. -- Cirt (talk) 19:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree the appropriate response was given and the unblock denial sound, I just wanted to drop you a small note regarding the ticket in case it becomes relevant at any time. -- Jezebel's  Ponyo bons mots 20:01, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

New articles for LGBT Project discussion..Dan Savage biblio
Rather than placing these on the Project Page I think they should go on the Talk Page..I also think that they're more likely to get some attention there. Pjefts (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I at least agree that both are appropriate places. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Bummer of a login
Hi. Thanks for your welcome note. It turns out, though, I just never noticed I wasn't logged in. Oh well. My userspace is found here for future reference. Schyler ( one language ) 02:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Could you do that? I would like to have the two edits under my username. Let me know on my talk page when the deed is done. Thanks a bunch! Schyler  ( one language ) 02:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That is, the removal of the tag on the article and the discussion top/bottom tags. Schyler  ( one language ) 02:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

✅ -- Cirt (talk) 03:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Email
Rivertorch (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello Cirt
I just wanted to drop a note to you. While we've not had a great deal of direct interaction, I noticed that we've both been involved in several of the same threads lately where you and I disagree on some fundamentals. (the Santorum stuff). I had to note that you have worked extremely hard to be reasonable, compassionate, understanding, and always showing the utmost respect for all editors and their viewpoints. While we may disagree on this particular article, it is a true pleasure to work with someone who shows so much maturity and understanding. Your efforts to find a reasonable compromise in the entire situation have not gone unnoticed. Thank you for being the type of editor and admin. that I think we should all aspire to. Cheers and best. — Ched : ?  14:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ched, thank you so much for your kind words, and for recognizing my efforts at a polite and respectful demeanor. I really appreciate that. A lot. So very much, actually. It means a lot to me. Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Ico-Man/BS.Player
Not sure whether to drag the discussion out of the archive, or just to ask here. Would you stand for or against reinstatement of the article, given the recent improvements? --Lexein (talk) 20:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really seeing enough there in terms of secondary source coverage. -- Cirt (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh. I thought three reviews was enough. --Lexein (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, the page appears to still be tagged with citations needed. -- Cirt (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I put those there, but am willing to assume good faith that there's changelog or bsplayer.org forum news announcement about it. You're saying it shouldn't reinstate with any challenged claims. --Lexein (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Right. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Meh. I'm not married to it. --Lexein (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Santorum
Funny that the discussion of this neologism seems to be best described by another neologism: truthiness, which seems to describe most of the arguments made by those who would see the article removed. In two years, santorum will be eligible for inclusion in the Oxford English Dictionary, and I wouldn't be totally surprised if it winds up there. That would amuse me greatly... but I doubt it would suffice to end the debate. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Cirt, I think the article lacks any real glaring issues at the moment... or, at least, I see nothing that I wouldn't fear would lead to an edit war if made at this time. I think there are a lot of highly politically-partisan hackles raised right now, and a fair number of editors engaged who cannot adequately divorce their personal feelings and political leanings from the rules of this community. For the same reason, I'm not sure how much good will be done by reasoned discussion: someone will come along with an impassioned-but-unsupported plea that Something Must Be Done that ignores opposing viewpoints....  At this point, I think it's clear that the article won't be deleted, merged, or substantially altered if the community consensus is respected.  It's nearing dead horse time... but it's equine flagellation time in US politics now, so I imagine the fury will keep seeking an outlet.  One must have faith that enough editors will shout down those who see WP:IAR as the answer to WP:IDONTLIKEIT... or, at least, that someone will actually put in the effort to bring forth a good, cogent argument for the other side that sways us, eh? (Perhaps the biggest lack of understanding 'twixt the sides is the difference between firm and intransigent with regard to beliefs...) // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 02:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
...for your kind note. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Hello! Your submission of The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OCNative (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Proposed an ALT1, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 06:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. ALT1 is good to go.  I've added a Pictogram voting keep.svg to The Commitment's entry Great ALT1 hook! OCNative (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

AfD: Parental Rights Amendment
Shouldn't this have been relisted? 4 deletes to 3 keeps (one "weak" and one from the article creator, who is paid to promote this bill) seems like a weak basis for keeping the article, even as "no consensus." Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * In any case, are you considering relisting the debate? Would DRV be an alternative? Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * A bit too late to relist. I would suggest you contact those that commented keep, ask them to further improve the article. Give them at least one week to do so. If they do not, I would have no objections to a re-nom for another AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 18:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, did. Thanks for your help! Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 18:48, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

truly disappointed
Hi, Cirt. May I say I am truly disappointed by both you and C.Fred? Anyway I did not expect you to side with conservatism. I am puzzled by the inappropriate action of deleting "burnt out diabetes" of a likely biased user and by your support for the said actions, in particular by your locking the deletion and for not allowing further discussion on this topic. FYI, the key word "burnt out diabetes" has over 2,000 positing and websites. It is a likely paradigm shifting concept, which, as the history of science and medicine has shown repeatedly, antagonizes traditionalists and those who have minimal tolerance for the scientific progress and for advances in science and medicine. History repeats itself. As for technicality of DELTERION OBJECTOIN (“use conventional methods to protest deletion”), not all people on the planet are as Wikipedia-savvy as certain biased. Instead of supporting people who have mitigated tolerance for new concepts and mark anything for deletion that is not consistent with “their” traditional and science-conservative expectations, you may wish to also support the underdog of the Wikipedia World in the interest of advancing freedom of science and allowing Wikipedia to grow rather than becoming yet another tool in the hands of the monitors of the monitors of the monitors…. Very few people mean vandalism, and to discredit a balanced effort of reviving an unfairly deleted page as "vandalism" and showing least tolerance for such efforts in not consistent with your impressive track record in your website. Hope we see your true you and your advocacy for freedom of science and against scientific fanatics.Burntout1234 (talk) 06:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI, this account is a sock of, who recreated Burnt-out diabetes mellitus and other variant titles about a dozen times tonight/this morning. I finally wound up SALTing the original title and blocking him for 31 hours. I had advised him before the block to contact you if he objected to your close of Articles for deletion/Burnt-out diabetes mellitus, and that if you and he couldn't resolve the situation, he could take the matter to DRV. —C.Fred (talk) 06:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked the sock, the sock should request unblock, through its main account. -- Cirt (talk) 06:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And I would grant an unblock request—obviously with the understanding that any attempt to create the article again would result in an immediate block. —C.Fred (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No objections to that. -- Cirt (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me mirror here the statement I made at User talk:Burntout123, rescinding my assent to an unblock. It's becoming clear that the user has an axe to grind against other users; until he can demonstrate willingness to participate civilly, I don't see a reason to shorten the block. —C.Fred (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright. -- Cirt (talk) 18:31, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Page protection
Just a friendly reminder - when you add a protection tag to a template like this, make sure you wrap it in tags. :-) Otherwise it's transcluded with the template and makes non-protected articles think they are protected. (Our articles are easily confused sometimes.) Avic<sub style="color:blue">ennasis  @ 19:14, 2 Sivan 5771 / 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 19:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit
Oh dear, I didn't notice this edit. You have no right to unilaterally enforce your opinion. I don't want trouble so I won't take it to AN/I, but I do want to register my distaste for this kind of action. BE—<span style="background:black;color:white;padding:2px 7px 4px 0px;text-shadow:white 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;font-size:100%;">—Critical __Talk 19:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I had already decided I was not going to do that a 2nd time, but another editor did agree that it was inappropriate, diff. Your edit removing all the comments of two other users diff was also inappropriate and contrary to talk page guidelines, but I don't want to push that either at this point in time. -- Cirt (talk) 19:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I realized that after I did it that I shouldn't have blanked. Did that once before too, just because it seems to me like the right thing to do with a thread which will just distract others.  Anyway, peace (BE—<span style="background:black;color:white;padding:2px 7px 4px 0px;text-shadow:white 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;font-size:100%;">—Critical __Talk 19:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And also onto you! :) -- Cirt (talk) 19:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Savage Love: Straight Answers from America's Most Popular Sex Columnist
Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Re
Thanks to you, for the incredible article. Edslov (talk) 02:33, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:24.177.120.138/Don't create an account
User:24.177.120.138/Don't create an account, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:24.177.120.138/Don't create an account and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:24.177.120.138/Don't create an account during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification. I will simply defer to the outcome of consensus expressed by the community from that discussion. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Skipping Towards Gomorrah
The DYK project (nominate) 08:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 08:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

RE Scoach
Yes, that would be great. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefa1992 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the advice, its amazing your work, congratulations. Edslov (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiWitch
Hello Cirt. Thank you for closing Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiWitch (second nomination). Would you please userfy to User:SmokeyJoe/Humor pages need to be relevant the last version (written by me) with the attribution history. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:SmokeyJoe/Humor pages need to be relevant. -- Cirt (talk) 03:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Note to self - New article creation project - Game for Vultures
Game for Vultures, novel by Michael Hartmann, 1976. -- Cirt (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Made into a film, A Game for Vultures.
 * 1) Fix both redirects, Game for Vultures and Game for vultures.
 * 2) Create a hatnote, from one to the other. (Slightly confusing with the only different being the "A" in the beginning).
 * 3) Begin research for WP:RS secondary sources, book reviews, news articles, etc.
 * 4) Think about sect on Film adaptation or just Adaptations within the book article.
 * 5) Draft up sourced brief article for author, currently empty with disambig at Michael Hartmann.
 * 6) Notes regarding relevant WikiProjects, post regarding interested parties to work on the article.
 * 7) IMDB page for author, not much there, link
 * 8) Other books by same author: The Hunted (1982), Days of Thunder (1980), Leap for the Sun (1976), Web of Dragons (1988)
 * 9) Research on the reception from secondary sources, of these other books.
 * 10) Credited also as co-author on the screenplay,
 * 11) Book,, and

The kid
Not done. Give me a few minutes. Then you can undo. :-) -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I've put it into more typical format. Can you streamline the awards table with a slightly smaller font?  Also, you should add a list of musical numbers.  See The King and I for formatting ideas.  This is a very good start.  All the best!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: the awards table, do you need so many refs? Is there one (or two) refs that give all the info using reliable sources? If so, I would delete the extra refs, as having so many refs make it seem like you do not trust any of them very much. Also, can you play around with the column widths so that the category column is wider, and the Result column is just a little bit wider - this way, some of these rows will fall on one line instead of two, making the table look more compact. Just a suggestion. As to the IP who was making dubious changes, let me know if you need any help. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah! I just looked at this on a wide-screen monitor, and the table falls perfectly there.  On a 4:3 ratio screen, though, it looks bulky.  It may be that you can't make it look great for all the viewers all the time.  So, whatever you think best.  But, I still think reducing the number of refs in the table, and only using the best ones is a good idea. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

pages deleted (request to restore in temp location)
Thanks for taking the time to explain. Would it be possible to restore the original Wikipedia entries (below) in temporary locations so that I may edit to make compliant with Wikipedia policy? I am the author of the source content with which there are alleged copyright violations. These Wikipedia articles have been live/active for a couple of years and thay have some good additions contributed by other Wikipedia authors. I would hate to lose their contributions. Many thanks for your consideration of this request. Brykerwoods (talk) 14:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailey_Park

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryker_Woods — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brykerwoods (talk • contribs)
 * I would be most willing to userfy them for you, so you can work on it further in a subpage of your userspace, if you so request it. -- Cirt (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Please userfy them so that I may work to satisfy Wikipedia standards. Many thanks! Brykerwoods (talk) 20:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 00:33, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Need some help
This user that you blocked before is still continuously vandalizing the site by changing genres as well as he has recently made personal attacks against me on the Emmure article. I would like you to take consideration into blocking this user once more since the admin at ARV isn't seeing the damage he is doing like you have. Users like him make everything a lot harder not to mention personal attacks is a major offense on here as you may know. Thank you =) --  GunMetal Angel   22:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Cirt, it is my understanding that you blocked that IP for attacking the above user, no? See my talk page for discussion with Gunmetal Angel, and the archive at ARV, where I and another admin refused to resort to blocking for that one genre change (that it took the poor IP four tries is beside the point). BTW, what did I hear today? WHO's running for the Republican nomination? Drmies (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess he blocked him for that reason or for the continuing genre changes. Doesn't matter nonetheless, I mainly only wanted to keep him informed since I suspected that you (Drmies) didn't really understand the situation but after speaking with you on your talk page you kind of get the picture now. --  GunMetal Angel   22:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No disrespect intended, Angel, but I've been around this block for some 74000 edits, and I know that what you know is disruptive may not always be actionable. If you source that article thoroughly and make it better, it is easy to keep it clean and to stave off genre crusaders. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I have ongoing health issues and surgeries regarding two family members at the same time. I will defer to the judgment of Drmies about this matter. -- Cirt (talk) 23:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Rick Ross Edit
Hey Cirt, Sorry about what happened with the information on the page earlier. I was in the process of adding in the citation before it was deleted. I appreciate the post on the talk page though!FWest2 (talk) 00:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Posted to the talk page about it. -- Cirt (talk) 00:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

deleted user page: nikitahorkoff
Hello, This is my first time doing this so I am not sure if I have done it correctly. You had recently deleted my Wikipedia Profile on June 1 at about 3:30pm. I had created the profile for a school assignment, and I had no intention of violating any policies. I am a university student at the University of Guelph. I am unsure what I had violated. I had troubles uploading my own picture on to Wikipedia and I am wondering if that was the problem. I honestly did not wish to show my user page to anyone except my professor. This assignment was a significant part of my grade and I did not wish to harm anyone or any violations. 99.232.206.156 (talk) 03:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

my user name was nikitahorkoff. 99.232.206.156 (talk) 03:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Nikita Horkoff 99.232.206.156 (talk) 03:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Cirt may not be able to answer at the moment, so I'll point you to the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nikita Horkoff, where your userpage was discussed and agreed to breach the rules here on what people can have on their userpages - click WP:UPNOT and WP:NOTWEBHOST for fuller discussion of why Wikipedia isn't a free webhost or personal website for you to write about yourself. If you want me to email the content of the page to you so that you can show something to your professor, please log into your account, enable email (in "my preferences") and leave me a message at user talk:Bencherlite. BencherliteTalk 13:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Account Cleaning
Any chance to unblock "burntout1234" (and its blocked IP), so that it function as the official doppelgänger of "burntout123" (THE LATTER ACCOUNT IS FULLY FUNCTIONAL & COMPLIANT)? It helps to be past the events and work collaboratively. -burntout123 --_To_Expand_Tolerance_ 04:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burntout123 (talk • contribs)


 * I advised him earlier today, in a comment on my talk page, "Best thing is to just stop using Burntout1234 entirely and make all future edits from Burntout123." —C.Fred (talk) 04:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Anyone know how I can get in touch with Zoe - used to share flat with her in Reading - love to get back in touch after all these years
--203.109.249.130 (talk) 09:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It's unlikely Cirt can help you, and Wikipedia isn't here for that sort of thing. You may be better off with Facebook. BencherliteTalk 13:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Bailey Park & Bryker Woods articles
Thanks for the WP:OTRS reference. I have added the following statement to the web pages (referenced below) used as source information for the two Wikipedia articles: •	User:Brykerwoods/Bailey Park •	User:Brykerwoods/Bryker Woods

Web pages with statement - “The text of this web page is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License.” •	http://www.txinfo.com/brykerwoods/BWNA/index.html •	http://www.txinfo.com/brykerwoods/History/index.html •	http://www.txinfo.com/brykerwoods/Parks/index.html

Please note that although I am the author, the material is not copyrighted and the content is to be considered that of the public domain. I want to make absolutely certain my Wikipedia article submissions comply with copyright standards/requirements.

Have I made the necessary changes required for the republishing of my Wikipedia articles?

Please direct me to a proper authority if such question is out of scope for your responsibilities.

Many thanks! Brykerwoods (talk) 15:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I have contacted  and I believe that I have taken adequate steps to eliminate the copyright problems associated with my Wikipedia entries. If so, how can the articles be made active again? Many thanks for any help you can provide. The two articles are: • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brykerwoods/Bryker_Woods and • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brykerwoods/Bailey_Park Thanks again for helping me with this important issue. Brykerwoods (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

AfD Inquiries
Hi! I'm a new user to Wikipedia, and my article is currently pending AFD. Since I notice you're a regular around this section, I have two inquiries about the procedures that need clarification:


 * (1) As the author of the article, am I allowed to cast a vote of Keep for my own article or is that not allowed? As I am a new user, I know my vote will carry little weight, but I still want to make my stance "official" so to speak.
 * (2) Also, how long do the AfD usually lasts? I know that the typical AfD is open for around a week, but are there any circumstances where this time period can be extended?

Any clarification would be so helpful to a newcomer like me. Thank you! Saracates (talk) 16:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Saracates -- Cirt (talk) 19:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is alright.
 * 1) See WP:RELIST.
 * Understood. Thank you for your sufficient clarification. Saracates (talk) 21:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Saracates

your protection to one of my user subpages
Could you please expand the protection for User:Crazymonkey1123/Edit Requests Charts to indefinite, as all of my other pages that were semi-protected because of user request are indefinitely semi-protected, except for User:Crazymonkey1123/Edit Requests Charts, which is why I am asking you to modify it. Thanks! Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T or M/Sign mine 23:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC) P.S. The reason I like to have almost all of my user subpages semi-protected because most of the edits made by unregistered or registered non-autoconfirmed user edits to my userspace are not constructive.
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Block of User:86.8.218.114
Could you explain to me why you used the word vandalism when blocking this user? As far as I can see none of their edits are vandalism but rather are attempts to improve the encyclopaedia. Per WP:VANDALISM that is not vandalism. A block may well have been warranted but I would have thought it would have been for edit warring rather than vandalism. Sorry about this being somewhat after the event but I've only just noticed it and I'm concerned we're being too harsh on this user and don't think describing their edits as vandalism is going to help. Dpmuk (talk) 09:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see subsequent behavior by the IP which resulted in more blocks, at block log. There are blocks there by two other admins, and . I will defer to their judgment about this matter. -- Cirt (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, that's fine. I just have a concern we (by which I mean the community at large) started off too bitey on this one.  It looks like to me that they were trying to improve the encyclopedia but were quickly (and, in my opinion, wrongly) accused of vandalism because they were not aware of an obscure essay (not even a guideline).  The messages also did very little to explain how wikipedia works - not one mentioned consensus for example.  Now I've got the view of the three blocking admins I'll drop them a note, explain things and offer to help them, and hopefully, if they are a serious editor, we won't have lost them. Dpmuk (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, sounds good. -- Cirt (talk) 21:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The Kid
Hi. Thanks for the invitation, but I have about 100 wikiprojects that I can't get to! Sorry! Of course, you are not obligated to take this article any further, so consider my suggestions merely suggestions for whoever wants to take it further in the future. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy
Yes, please see the edit summary in which I removed gthe sppeedy tag. The article states that the subject is a crowned ehad of state. Thus it is not eligable fopr speedy under those criteria.

Secondly the author had placed and "admin-help" template on the page, which seemed to me a bona-fide (if completely broken) attempt to challenge the speedy.

Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 02:07, 10 June 2011 (UTC).

RE: Thank You
Your're welcome, and YGM. ۞  Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  02:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks"> Thanks for identifying all of those "Prince Joel" / "P-Diddy" socks. I remember getting very frustrated a few weeks ago trying to locate and track down the various articles, categories and files some of these socks had created. Enjoy the cookie! Singularity42 (talk) 02:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You are welcome! I think I shall go take a break and have some peanut butter ... -- Cirt (talk) 02:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you, very much! This is most appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

A concern
Hi Cirt, I have a concern about your editing.

On AN/I on May 27, in response to complaints about the interaction between yourself and Jayen, I asked him to consider not filing an RfC on you until some of the heat had died from the situation, because it seemed you were feeling embattled. In return you agreed to take on board the criticism that you seem to edit too much to further what might be personal interests. 

Now I see on your talk page that you had two DYKs on June 5 for articles you created or expanded about Dan Savage. Savage is the writer who began the neologism campaign against Rick Santorum that you recently expanded the article on, taking it from 1,500 words to over 5,000. You also created Dan Savage bibliography, and three templates to which you added the neologism: Template:Dan Savage, Template:Political neologisms, and Template:Sexual slang. It was this editing, in part, that lay behind the AN/I concerns.

On May 29—after the AN/I discussion—you proposed a third DYK related to Savage, on May 30 a fourth,  on June 1 a fifth,  and today a sixth. 

I'm confused about this, and would appreciate an explanation. SlimVirgin <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 05:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Just noting here that you proposed another one during the AN/I discussion on May 27, which was at the top of the DYK queue about to be posted. So that was seven DYKs you suggested about Savage over the course of a week or so, two of which appeared on the main page on the same day.  SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 08:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The DYKs and associated articles are not related to recent politics, but if you would like I will remove those currently being considered as DYK candidates. -- Cirt (talk) 05:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be very helpful if you could remove them, but could you explain why seem to be promoting Dan Savage? SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * SlimVirgin, as a gesture of good faith I removed all of the DYK self-noms that were currently being considered as candidates, diff. Your assumption is incorrect about my motivations, but if you have a specific comment about a particular article, I would hope we could address it at the article's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 06:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for doing that. Cirt, it's not a question of motivation. The upshot is promotion, no matter what the intent. Placing one writer's name on the main page six times in a short space of time would be of tremendous value to that person.


 * We all write about issues that interest us, including people we know about and admire, and want others to know about. There's nothing wrong with that. But several (reasonable) people have gained the impression that it regularly crosses the line with you into promotion, which was the reason an RfC was suggested. You said or implied that you'd make an effort not to do anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way in future, and I really think it would be in your own interests to stick to that. SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin, as a further gesture of good faith, I just removed all DYK related pages from my watchlist. I intend to not nominate anything to DYK again for an extended period of time. -- Cirt (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Pardon the intrusion, but as an uninvolved party I would prefer that the DYK nominations be restored. These are quality, eligible articles and removing the nominations might be seen as bowing to political pressures being applied to Wikipedia by external forces. (If news stories are to be believed, the Santorum campaign is working to "clean up" his image on the internet in preparation for a presidential run. These efforts and ambitions should have zero effect on the contents of this encyclopedia or on the workings of its various projects.) Loss of Cirt's contributions would be a blow to the quality of both DYK and Wikipedia. - Dravecky (talk) 06:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No. I will not restore my noms. If others wish to add them back, so be it, but I am no longer watching any pages on Wikipedia related to DYK. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 06:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is also another Savage DYK in the queue. Do you mind if I remove that too, Cirt? SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin, I will not object to that. Again, I am not going to watch those pages any longer related to DYK. -- Cirt (talk) 06:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have boldly reverted Cirt's withdrawal of those approved hooks. If anyone feels it's necessary, I could renominate the hooks myself but in my opinion that would be a waste of valuable time and effort by the editors who have already checked out these articles and approved these hooks. Any "promotion" concerns can be overcome by spacing out the presentation on the main page over many days rather than quashing the nominations altogether. - Dravecky (talk) 06:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Dravecky, I am sorry but I must request that further discussion take place at WT:DYK which is no longer on my watchlist and not at my user talk page. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 06:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * (ec) Cirt, I'd appreciate it if you would ask that the one in the queue be removed—wherever is appropriate to do that—rather than simply saying you don't mind, which leaves others to argue about it. The aim is to avoid further dispute about this whole situation, including on AN/I and RfC, not to trigger yet more discussion. SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:34, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin, as a further gesture of good faith I have done as you suggested, diff. -- Cirt (talk) 06:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, SlimVirgin. -- Cirt (talk) 06:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Dravecky has reverted you, and now me. My advice to you is to act decisively to sort this out. The way things are going there's a chance your editing will end up at the ArbCom, and I don't mean only the Savage situation, which is just the latest example. I can only speak for myself, but my view is that you will not fare well at ArbCom. It's therefore strongly in your own interests to sort this out yourself, and not leave it to others.  SlimVirgin  <small style="color:gold">TALK| <small style="color:lime">CONTRIBS 06:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

If you have other suggestions for what I can do regarding edits to the DYK pages or comments at WT:DYK, I would appreciate hearing them. -- Cirt (talk) 06:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) SlimVirgin, I removed the hooks myself.
 * 2) I requested at WT:DYK that they not be considered.
 * 3) I requested at WT:DYK that the other hook in the queue not be considered and be removed.
 * 4) I stated to you above that I will not be nominating anything to DYK in the future.
 * 5) I told you that I have removed all DYK related pages from my watchlist.
 * Update: I have removed my self-nom hooks from T:TDYK a 2nd time, diff. -- Cirt (talk) 06:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: I posted another request to WT:DYK, requesting that my self-noms be removed from consideration, diff. -- Cirt (talk) 07:00, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed this discussion only now. My concern: isn't promotion something positive, (pro + motion), especially the promotion of knowledge? Please don't withdraw that from DYK which should be exactly that, to my understanding, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt, I thank you for your positive comments about the quality of my contributions to Wikipedia. However, I feel I must point out to you that I have made several good faith gestures (as noted, above), including avoiding involvement in the DYK process in the future, which will hopefully help facilitate moving on from this issue. Thanks again for your kind words about my writing on the project, -- Cirt (talk) 22:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I replied here, sort of. I respect your decision but will miss your contributions to DYK, did you know? - I really like the four (missing) hooks combined, varied and catchy, I didn't want to add anything there, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the heads up. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Popcaan and other 'poorly sourced BLPs'
Can you explain your deletion of Popcaan? It does not appear to have been deleted within any established process. I see from you logs that you have also deleted several other articles with the explanation 'poorly sourced BLP', which is not a valid criterion for speedy deletion. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 06:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I have restored Popcaan and another one that you deleted, Konshens and added sources. If you come across any other articles on reggae artists that you have concerns about, please tag them appropriately rather than deleting them using your own criteria - every previously unsourced BLP in the reggae WikiProject has been sourced or otherwise dealt with appropriately by established process. --Michig (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Most of those pages were created by a sockfarm - and were quite poorly sourced BLPs, or in fact completely unsourced BLPs with zero references. However, upon reexamination, your interpretation of possible noteworthiness may indeed be accurate. Therefore, I have no objections to your restorations. -- Cirt (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Ed Poor's talk page topic ban on Unification church related articles
Arbitration/Requests/Amendment. You received this notification because you have edited Unification Church related articles. Andries (talk) 10:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 21:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of article on Ed Alleyne-Johnson
You deleted the article on the above named. (See discussion ). FYI, Ed Alleyne-Johnson was a member of New Model Army in the late 1980s, a band from Bradford, UK, formed in the early 1980s. During his tenure with the band, he recorded two very popular albums on EMI with them (Thunder & Consolation, 1989 and Impurity, 1990), respectively reaching #20 and #23 in the UK albums chart. He toured with them for five years. He is recognized as coining (in collaboration with the band) a new, "folky" sound in alternative rock. The mere fact that he now chooses to mostly busk and has since only recorded less popular albums should not be taken as a reason to present him as "unencyclopaedic". 89.168.157.63 (talk) 10:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Suggest you create an account on Wikipedia. Then, if you so request it, I will be more than happy to provide you with a version of the article, in a subpage of your userspace, so you may attempt to improve its quality to satisfy notability specifications on Wikipedia. -- Cirt (talk) 21:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Don't bother. Google's cache is enough what with getting hold of the "old version", and is also enough for people to read if they're interested in the topic. Just at an (ever so superficial) glance, BTW, at your linked document, I see that "Notability does not directly affect the content of articles, but only their existence." Which means, that notability does not have anything to do with the quality of the article in question, but rather asks if the topic's existence is justified by available sources. This would, IMHO, put the ball back in your court. You only considered _one_ piece of evidence when you had your "discussion" with one or two others over the usefulness of having the topic in question on this website. In a way I would have preferred if the article had been signified as a "stub". OTOH, as I said, I'm not really bothered and am not going to bother. And especially not with any organisational politics. So, the info is there if people want it, everybody else is probably not interested in the first place as it's rather geared at people who read the CD booklets ;-). Thanks and enjoy your weekend. 89.168.157.63 (talk) 12:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK
After I saw the issues unfold about about SlimVirgin's concerns I took some time to look back over your contributions. You seemed to do very good work, and it seems a shame that the DYK project should lose out on your contributions. I just want to stop by give give a few words of encouragement. Judging from the initial response there it is clear your work on that project will be missed. I know you don't wish to rock the boat, and are taking a bit of a break, but don't let they keyboard get too cold. I think the only major concern was that the main page was unintentionally promoting Dan Savage a bit too much, and you should feel free to contribute about other topics that your interested in, when your ready to pick it up again. ( Forgive the nonsensical edit summary. )Thenub314 (talk) 21:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That you for the kind comments about my efforts to contribute quality content to Wikipedia. It is most appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 21:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome!
I see you're an admin at Commons and hope you don't mind my asking a question, since I'm very new there. I recently transferred some free use files and they have a tag saying they need to be checked. Is it OK for me to check them or does an admin need to do that? Will have more to move to Commons but didn't want to do any further moving until I found out who is to check the file and remove the tag. Thanks! We hope (talk) 14:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! We hope (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Please un-block doppelgänger burntout1234
Not sure if you are in charge re burntout1234, any chance that you kindly release burntout1234 as the legitimate and fully disclosed doppelgänger of butntout123 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Burntout123 )? If you are not in charge, kindly refer me to whoever is in charge. Thanks. -- --S.Buntout123 (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please consult admin . -- Cirt (talk) 20:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * See my reply to the request at User_talk:JoeSperrazza JoeSperrazza (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Grube & Hovsepian
Just prodded Grube & Hovsepian and noticed it was previuosly deleted at AFD(Articles_for_deletion/Grube_%26_Hovsepian). As you where the deleting admin I figure maybe some process allows it to be deleted again, but I don't know how it works so just letting you know in case some action is appropriate. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Draft of Thomas_Erl
Hi Cirt,

Based on your comments, I edited the page of User:Edited_by_Sanjay/Thomas_Erl to provide various links and references to external websites which are not owned by the author. The content was re-phrased after I looked at pages of other authors in the same field (IT & Software Engineering) and took their best practices in creating this page. I have tried best to provide sufficient links in the External Links section that points to author's page & articles on the web. I would like to move the page to main namespace. Please let me know if you have any comments. Thanks. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 10:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, I went through the WP:CITE and WP:CIT based on your comments and updated the article. I used the templates for citation such as cite book, cite web, based on the citation required. Also added accessed date to those links which didn't had specific dates. Still if you feel I need to make specific changes, I would be more than happy to take your inputs. Do you think now the article can be published to the main namespace as it has sufficient references & links to verify the author's work? Appreciate your continuous support. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, Thanks for your quick response. However I am a bit confused with the 'bare links' phrase. Does it refer to the citations such as SOASchool.com or SOA Magazine? They are not pointed to a specific article on the website, instead they point directly to the website showing the work of the author. Regarding the secondary sources, I have tried to provide primary sources in the articles and also many references in the external links that points to authors interviews, articles, & seminars - all of which are external sources. I might be missing something help and any help citing examples would be great. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 06:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, Thanks for your comment, based on which I updated the article with parameters for the cite templates. Looking forward for your views. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 14:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cirt. Your guidelines were helpful in guiding me to edit the article and learn more about WP guidelines. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 15:55, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration case
Hey there. A quick note that I've opened a request for an Arbitration case that names you as a party over that whole "santorum" mess. You can find the request and my arguments on the RfAR page. &mdash; Coren (talk) 15:10, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

question about a deletion
This one. You cite an MfD that was closed as no consensus, which defaults to keep. Could you explain why you deleted a year later? Your apparently out-of-process deletion is being cited as precedent. → ROUX   ₪  03:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed it, it was per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiWitch (second nomination). -- Cirt (talk) 04:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Mail
You've got some waiting for you. ~<i style="color:#07517C">Super</i> Hamster  Talk Contribs 04:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Userfication request
I see you recently deleted WikiWitch. Could you move it, along with its history, to user:Buddy431/WikiWitch? Thank you. Buddy431 (talk) 03:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * (Answering on Cirt's behalf, given his comments above) - it's already been moved to User:SmokeyJoe/Humor pages need to be relevant, so it can't be moved to your userspace as well without asking . BencherliteTalk 13:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Only the last version has been moved to SmokeyJoe's page. I was hoping for the entire history. Buddy431 (talk) 05:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please contact, perhaps you two can work collaboratively together on this. -- Cirt (talk) 05:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd have slightly preferred the full history, but consider the last version to be essentially original with respect the previous versions, so don't consider it a copyright issue. I guess it is safer to keep the unacceptable versions deleted.  Essentially, they describe a successful (ie correct) humor page nominator as a witch, pejoratively.  Buddy431, what is your interest in in the WikiWitch history?  Cirt, you may like to copy/move this thread to User talk:SmokeyJoe/Humor pages need to be relevant.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nah, just please continue the rest of the discussion there. You can copy it though, if you like. :) -- Cirt (talk) 13:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry dude for not providing the book sales for the other Savage books. My condition is at present hindering me to go to the library. I will add them as soon as I go their, latest. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 06:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My left hand and left leg was fractured in a bike accident 4 months ago. I'm still recovering from it. That's why it makes more time for me nowadays to develop an article or to find source for something. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 14:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Someone wishes to register a complaint
This edit was made to Articles_for_deletion/Radical_(mixtape) after you punched it. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Your block of my account
was completely unwarranted and an abuse of your position.129.133.127.244 (talk) 01:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There were multiple prior warnings by multiple different editors. -- Cirt (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Best wishes
Sounds like real-life is tough at the moment. Best of luck with it all. Hobit (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! That means a lot to me. Especially during this difficult time in my life. :) Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
This editor does have a point because from the point of view of an outsider or someone unfamiliar with the way we do things here, one delete !vote hardly looks like a "consensus". On the other hand, this demonstrates the drawback of creating one article and showing up every year or so just to make sure it's still here. Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Deleting of Riccardo De Pra page
Dear sir, I'm the author of the deleted article. I understand the policy of wikypedia. I'm passionate about food and I love this great chef. When I found the Riccardo De Pra page first, I though it was too poor... but at the end I made a big (maybe) too big biography. The problem is that now even the page I found about him does not exist anymore for my mistake.... so could you help me? is it possible to recreate the first page I found that had only one source http://www.theworlds50best.com/tag/riccardo-del-pra. thanks viola — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laviolachetiama (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If you wish it, I would be most willing to userfy the page for you, so you can work on it in a subpage of your userspace, in order to attempt to satisfy WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 22:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Order at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates
I forgot which way it should be. Feel free to shuffle it around.  OhanaUnited  Talk page  04:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Created new portal = Supreme Court of the United States
I've created a new portal for this topic. Collaboration and help would be appreciated, just drop a note at Portal talk:Supreme Court of the United States. -- Cirt (talk) 17:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Portal:Supreme Court of the United States

Why did you
Why did you delete my page TheNew? 74.238.2.131 (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Deleted after Articles for deletion/The New. -- Cirt (talk) 18:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

You deleted my page as well
You deleted my article on Evelyn Taft, even though you were not justified. She is a broadcast meteorologist and is seen by thousands every day. She has also risen through ranks much faster than most her age. I thank you for your interest, but I would like the article reinstated. I will look for some additional sources in the meantime. Lindsapw (talk) 21:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Lindsapw
 * He didn't just delete it. It was decided in Articles for deletion/Evelyn Taft. Lady  of  Shalott  21:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Category
We are having a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Four Award about the category. Please comment there if you have an opinion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the Bacon Challenge 2012
Hello! You have been invited to take part in the Bacon Challenge 2012. In case you don't know or need a refresher, the Bacon Challenge is an annual celebration of bacon on Wikipedia in which editors come together to help create, expand, and improve Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. The event lasts all the way through National Pig Day 2012, giving participants plenty of time to work at their pleasure. In addition to the Bacon Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup 2012, a side event to the Challenge in which all bacon-related contributions done by those participating in the Challenge are submitted and scored by the scorekeeper (me) based on the scoring chart. At the end of the Challenge, the user with the most points in the Bacon WikiCup will win a shiny trophy for their userpage. In addition, the users who score the highest in specific categories (not yet finalized, but the categories include most image uploads, most article creations, most DYK submissions, and more) will win barnstars. Finally, all participants will receive a medal. While the awards are nice, in the end, the important thing is to have fun and enjoy what we're all here for, which is improving Wikipedia.

If you decide to participate, great! You may add your name to the participants list at the main page of the Bacon Challenge 2012, and pick up the userbox for your userpage if you desire. Signing up for the Challenge will also automatically enter you into the Bacon WikiCup. If you don't wish to participate, that's fine too - maybe next year! In the meantime, if you know anyone who might also be interested in participating, feel free to invite them! The Challenge is open to anyone and accepts participants at any time, so feel free to let anyone who might be interested know.

Note that I, the scorekeeper of the Bacon WikiCup, will be on vacation starting on the 18th of June all the way up until the 5th of July. I will have limited access to the internet, so I may or may not be able to score users' contributions during this time. Sorry for any delay in scoring (but since the Challenge lasts for more than half a year, there's no rush, right? (= ).

I'm looking forward to another fun, successful year. Thanks! ~<i style="color:#07517C">Super</i> Hamster  Talk Contribs 22:46, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I shall beat you this time! >:3 Silver  seren C 02:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you shall! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 02:38, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oo, do I see a challenge within the challenge? :) Lady  of  Shalott  01:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really, I'm probably not going to be as active this time round. :( -- Cirt (talk) 01:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

User:MarioPool
Cirt, you recently closed Articles for deletion/Tv Russia. Because you are the last administrator to deal with articles created by this author, I was wondering if you might be able to assist with the issue I raised at WP:ANI. Thanks. Singularity42 (talk) 14:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Andrew Biersack
Hi there,

I just recreated this page as a redirect because inevitably someone is going to recreate it and we're going to have to AFD again. Is there any chance you could protect the article redirect? N o f o rmation Talk 00:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, for one year. With no objections to any other admin unprotecting it at any point in time, per their judgment. :) -- Cirt (talk) 00:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, sir. There's even a chance that in a year this subject will be notable, so I think that was a good call.  N o f o rmation  Talk 00:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Everything tastes better
I've left some more notes in my section. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 00:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The Futuristics
You deleted this page because of poor sources but after reading the general notability guidelines I'm confused as to why. The Lonely Island webpage is a credible site by a notable group, which mentions this production team as having worked with them. Can you please consider restoring this Wiki article as it meets all sufficient guidelines? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.155.161 (talk) 01:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd encourage you to create an account, and then I could move the content to a subpage in your userspace for you to work on as a draft version. -- Cirt (talk) 01:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Great, my username is DerekAC7. Please let me know what I need to do in order to work on a draft. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerekAC7 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:DerekAC7/The Futuristics. -- Cirt (talk) 06:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

User NestleNW911
Hi Cirt, I was reading the Scientology page yesterday and noted church propaganda in there. I did some research and it turns out the sequence of events is as follows. After using OSA dead agent files on Tony Ortega (look for his may 17th edit of the talk page) Nestle was able to get another user to delete the Tom Cruise confessional files from the David Miscavige page on june 13th. Perhaps encouraged by this success, Nestle has been adding church propaganda to both Miscavige's page and the Scientology page in the last couple of days. I am in the proces of getting them reversed (I signed up yesterday, so no can do myself). However, since it is becoming obvious that Nestle is a Sea Org/OSA operative and not a Scientology enthusiast, I was wondering if the Scutterbug sockpuppet case against Nestle should be reopened. If you would care to take a look, I'd appreciate. Thanks, Startwater (talk) 15:56, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Cirt, thanks for your support. I feel that the fact I am new here, will undermine a sockpuppet case from my side. I am able to convincingly argue that Nestle is an OSA operative, which might open an alternative course of action since OSA itself is banned from editing (I believe). If this is a viable course of action, could you please give some pointer as towards where to start - I don't know my way around in this bureacratic maze. If not, I'll add comments to the Scatterbug sockpuppet page, to help build the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Startwater (talk • contribs) 17:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Cirt, reading through the archive of Shutterbug sockpuppets, I felt I found enough examples of behavior patterns by previous Shutterbug socks compared to NestleNW911 that I decided to move forward the SPI. I hope I've done so correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Startwater (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Opera/Featured content
Hi Cirt. I was confused by the changes you made to this page. It caused all the featured content to disappear from the portal. The area under the "Featured content" heading became completely blank apart from the star icon. I've reverted the change for now, but perhaps it was in preparation for a future bot run? Let me know what I should do as I'm not keen on leaving the section blank. I'm also not sure if we need a bot to do this. We have a relatively small amount of featured content and it's easy to keep track of. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Cartoon Network
Hi Cirt, would you mind if explain at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cartoon Network (2nd nomination)? I've nominated the Cartoon Network portal myself for deletion before and speedy deleted, and recreated and renominated myself again. Yes I know, I've been nominating lot of dead WikiProjects for deletion at WP:MFD like WikiProject Conan O'Brien, WikiProject MythBusters and WikiProject Star Wars Music which had been deleted due to very narrow scope and low activity, including attempted deletions like WikiProject Discworld and WikiProject Media franchises which had been kept. Would you mind if you discuss this? Thanks. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  07:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hrm, I'm on the fence about this one, I think I'll just defer to the outcome of the community consensus. :) -- Cirt (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon
I'm sorry to appear difficult in Everything Tastes Better with Bacon's FAC, but believe me that's not my intention. I still have some reservations about the presentation of the context within which this book was published, but you've gone at least some way to addressing that. If the prose could be buffed up a little more I could be persuaded to at least strike my oppose. Malleus Fatuorum 19:01, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * "... is a book about cooking bacon, written by Sara Perry". It's not really a book about cooking bacon, as in here's how you fry it, grill it, barbecue it and so on, but about cooking with bacon.


 * "It was first published in 2002 by Chronicle Books." Has it been published more than once, as "first" implies? Has it gone through more than one edition?


 * "In this book ...". As opposed to some other book? Why would a reader suppose that we weren't describing this book in an article about this book?


 * "Perry manifests her original concept of recipes combining sugar and bacon in more than 70 recipes for bacon-flavored dishes ...". That just isn't right. Apart from the high-faluting "manifests her original concept", which was hardly original at all, and the repetition of "recipes ... recipes", her "concept" wasn't of combining sugar and bacon in more than 70 recipes, she just happened to come up with 70 recipes.


 * "The book received positive reviews, and recipes from the book were selected for inclusion ...". More repetition, "book ... book". I count five "books" in the first two sentences of the second paragraph, ignoring the "cookbooks".


 * "... in more than 70 recipes for bacon-flavored dishes, including desserts". But the Contents summary section says that "She offers 70 recipes for bacon-flavored dishes", not more than 70.


 * Content summary
 * "The author believes that consuming bacon can become habitual." Anything can become habitual, but what has this to do with a content summary?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malleus Fatuorum (talk • contribs) -- Cirt (talk) 02:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Genre
 * "The Atlantic commented that three years after the book's publication, appreciation of bacon had entered a "cult stage", and was as popular as chocolate or olive oil." Not quite right. It wasn't the appreciation of bacon that had become as popular as chocolate or olive oil but bacon itself. And what has that to do with genre? All I see is one sentence hinting at a genre of bacon cookbooks. Where does Perry's book fit into that? Was it the first, the most influential?
 * Responses to above comments by Malleus Fatuorum
 * 1) Good point, I've changed "about" to "with".
 * 2) Removed word, "first", makes this less ambiguous, thanks.
 * 3) Trimmed, as that phrase was unnecessary&mdash;thanks, it's more concise this way. :)
 * 4) I've tweaked this sentence a bit. I broke it up into two smaller sentences. I removed some of the wording (which had been previously suggested by another user that commented at the FAC). I copyedited it a bit more.
 * 5) Removed more instances of word, "book".
 * 6) Astute suggestion, indeed it's more likely for a third-party to have noticed it with fresh eyes&mdash;I've gone ahead and removed instances of word, "book".
 * 7) Removed "more than", it's not really needed anyways.
 * 8) Copyedited this, removed this sentence, added some more useful info from the same source.
 * 9) Merged the Genre and Impact subsections, into one section that is a bit more meaty.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malleus Fatuorum (talk • contribs) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Reception
 * "Kate Lawson of the Detroit News commented that the book's popularity was due to an increased interest in cooking with bacon." Isn't that a pretty dumb-nut thing to say? A book on cooking with bacon was popular because there was an increased interest in cooking with bacon? Duh!
 * "Lawson noted the author had compiled fundamental information about bacon in the book." Err, like what? In what way "fundamental"? Its molecular composition?
 * "... Perry's technique of cooking bacon was the best out of other types of methods." That really needs to be reworked. "Best out of"? "Other types of methods"?
 * "... yet noted its lack of comprehensiveness and small number recipes included."
 * "... and commented favorably on the author's excitement in writing about cooking with bacon." How could she tell that the author was excited? (It shouldn't be "in writing" anyway, as apart from anything else it makes it look like it was jordan who was writing about cooking with bacon, in which she mentioned Perry's excitement.) Does she mean "enthusiasm"? Did she really comment on the authors feelings about writing about cooking with bacon or about cooking with bacon?
 * Responses to 2nd set of above comments by Malleus Fatuorum
 * 1) I've removed that sentence altogether.
 * 2) I went ahead and removed this as well.
 * 3) Trimmed this sentence out of the article.
 * 4) Removed that phrase.
 * 5) Removed this wording, replaced it with direct quote from source.

Freegold
Hi Cert,

You decided to delete the wiki Freegold after its delete discussion was expired. However, the discussion did not continue after the wiki was modified to address the arguments raised. In short, I think the discussion was improperly closed, and needed at least more time to allow a further discussion and broader consensus before reaching a conclusion. Please let me know on my personal talk page, it is my first request for undelete and I am not sure this is the proper way to proceed. Rd2c (talk) 19:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be most willing to userfy it for you, so you can work further on a draft version in a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 19:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Userfication is not needed, the wiki was completed after the initial discussion arguments were done. Ik think the page can be restored and the discussion for deletion extended to allow new discussion/review of the changes. Rd2c (talk) 19:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry but consensus was otherwise. I repeat my offer to userfy so you can further improve the page, and argue for its inclusion on Wikipedia by improving it to satisfy WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 01:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cirt, let's go that route then. The wiki was modified to meet WP:NOTE, but not discussed after. So let's userfy it and go from there. Any hint on how to get it agued/reviewed again for inclusion? Thanks for your patience. Rd2c (talk) 06:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

✅, now at User:Rd2c/Freegold. -- Cirt (talk) 06:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, highly appreciated! Rd2c (talk) 13:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Improvident Deletion
Cirt:

I wanted to discuss the deletion of the article on Scott M. Seaman with you prior to challenging the deletion further. I was in the process of researching and improving the article after reading the last couple of comments submitted yesterday. The article on its face demonstrates notability. The subject's legal writings on insurance law (particularly on allocation and excess insurance have been recognized by state and federal courts across the country as authoritative and have been relied upon by courts in rendering decisions that bind the parties and set precedent. The subject has been counsel in several important, precedent setting insurance cases and that is reflected by specific citations. These citations are all independent of the subject.  I appreciate that those commenting may not be lawyers, but notability and solid sourcing should be apparent to any fair minded reader.

That Seaman’s books and articles have been recognized by courts and by insurance commentators is beyond cavil as reflected not only by the existing citations, but also be some of the additonal citations I was in the process of adding. For example,  Plastics Engineering Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. 514 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2008) (federal circuit court of appeal); Aquino v. Pacesetter Adjustment Co., 416 F.Supp.2d 181 (D.Mass. 2005) (federal district court); Spaulding Composites Co., Inc. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, 176 N.J. 25, 819 A.2d 410 (N.J. Sup. Ct. 2003) (New Jersey Supreme Court); Beaufort County School Dist. v. United National Ins. Co., (S. C. Ct. App. Feb. 2011) (South Carolina’s highest court) availabable at http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/opinions/HTMLFiles/COA/4794%20.htm; Tresdale Ins. v. TIG Ins. Co., (W.D. Pa 2009) (federal district court); In re Feature Realty Litigation, F.Supp.2d, 2007 WL 2703002 (E.D.Wash.,2007) (federal district court); Greene, Tweed & Co., Inc. v. Hartford Acc. & Ind. Co., (E.D. Pa. 2006) (federal district court),  available at http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/06d0493p.pdf; Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 145 Md.App. 256, 802 A.2d 1070 (Md.App.,2002) (Maryland appeals court); Kephart by Tutwiler v. Pendergraph, 131 N.C.App. 559, 507 S.E.2d 915 (N.C.App.1998) (North Carolina appeals court); United Nat. Ins. Co. v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 24 Mass.L.Rptr. 236, 2008 WL 2745218 (Mass. Super. 2008); In re Feature Realty Litigation, 2007 WL 2703002 (E.D.Wash. 2007); Commercial Property & Casualty Underwriters Reinsurance Encounters, VOl.28, No. 3 (Dec. 2010) at __ (“informative reference”) available at http://reinsurance.cpcusociety.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/8115/folder/22164/ReinsDec2010.pdf at 3; Defense Research Foundation’s For the Defense (April 2011), available at http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:x6Dn04G853IJ:www.mpbf.com/news/articles/FTD-pdf.pdf+scott+m.+seaman&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiVt2IECL7aJGysbz6sY7HyVrJsZaoYrLmcwj7l17MclCbQPpgo2d55Wpd0mJjcCiIHE9-0294t5VYVkjlyy-7VqnBXQnoeBA6hFhMCYwgByIhr3eIATmiJcjhoXX-EbS1wMiG&sig=AHIEtbTz83PwVnlHutv2eccKTnN1x52RmQ; Hein On Line Journals (noting that Seaman’s article “Excess Liability Insurance; Law and Litigation, 32 Tort & Ins. L. J. 653 (1996-97) has been cited by numerous commentators), available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/ttip32&div=42&id=&page=; Journal of Texas Insurance Law article, available at http://www.mdjwlaw.com/JTIL/Spring2006.pdf; The American University Law Review, Vol. 47 (1998), available at  http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1396&context=aulr&sei-redir=1; http://www.cerium.ca/IMG/pdf/EMERGING_ISSUES_GLOBAL_WARMING_CLAIMS_AND_COVERAGE_ISSUES-2.pdf; http://www.munichre.com/publications/302-05493_en.pdf. Some of his legal awards are sourced to the institution providing them.

As to his charible work, the article was sourced and shows notability by virtue of fundraising, educational activities, formatinon of a chapter of an organization and forming another organization. People are included in this on-line source just by virtue of hosting a radio or television show or writing a book. The article on its face demonstrates that the subject hosts a television and radio show, wrote a book on cancer, and writes a column on cancer and was instrumental in forming a walk that is in multiple cities. He has been awarded for his work. My research already revealed the subject was profiled in numerous publications including the Chicago Sun Times, The Daily Herald, My Suburban Press, etc. Couple Honored for Fight Against Cancer Daily Herald (Nov. 5, 2007); Fight against a disease becomes a campaign, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Vol 153 No. 207 (Oct.22,  2007); Chicago Sun Times, (Oct. 30, 2007) (Stella Foster noting in her column that subject was being honored at gala for establishing chapter for lymphoma research); "Couple honored for cancer work” My Suburban Life/Bartlett Press Newspaper, Nov. 2007, available at http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/bartlett/news/x799508674; Local couple's bike-ride fundraiser to benefit cancer research My Suburban Life/Bartlett Press Newspaper My Suburban Life/Bartlett Press Newspaper, Sept. 2010, available at http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/bartlett/archive/x90334335/Local-couples-bike-ride-fundraiser-to-benefit-cancer-research; “Service awards” Chicago Sun Times (Nov. 4, 2010), available at http://www.suntimes.com/news/foster/2241982-452/chicago-awards-nov-wednesday-service.html.

I think the article should be restored immediately. CityofChicago1998 (talk) 04:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC) CityofChicago1998
 * I'd be most willing to userfy it for you, so you can work on improving it within a subpage of your userspace, in order to demonstrate WP:NOTE. -- Cirt (talk) 04:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Cirt. CityofChicago1998 (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:CityofChicago1998/Scott M. Seaman. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Bacon book
Hey Cirt, I found it!!!! An article in Chicago Tribune notes how bacon sales increased as part of impact of the book, noting its 30,000 sales in the first month as an indication of reader's change of book taste. Wanna know how I got it. I saw the news in the Tribune archives in the library and tried searching the Tribune online archives. It seems they had it. Hope it helps. :) — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 06:08, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! -- Cirt (talk) 06:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And also thanks for your help for catching that 56** sock. CCan you believe the amount of puppets this person has created? Shocking indeed. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 06:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're quite right, and I'd no idea it was not just a sock ... but a sock of a banned user. -- Cirt (talk) 06:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This is what I copied: "Perry's book also emphasizes this fact that bacon's are no longer just a breakfast staple, it is infact a delicacy from entrees to even desserts (yes!). Readers seem to agree with her,seeing that the book ended up selling 30,000 copies in a month and sure those who brought it, brought bacon to their home as well." Mind you, this does not mention that the sales were as per Nielse BookScan, so its possible that book clubs etc were involved as Nielsen does not include them in their sales tally. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 06:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggest change in article project
What about changing it to Time, Inc. v. Hill. There is presently no article (it was decided by the Court in 1967). And yes, it is a freedom of the press case. It is interesting for a number of reasons, first it was reargued (not certain about rebriefing) and the appellee's council was some lawyer from New York named (consults notes) Richard Nixon, and I have oodles of bios of Nixon.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Wehwalt. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Przemysław Jastrzębski
I assume this was just an oversight, but this afd also reached a consensus to delete Tomasz Ptak. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Hudson Valley
Minor cough. As I'm uninvolved, I'm happy to promote it if you're a bit tied up, but if you'd rather do the honours as you promised... BencherliteTalk 21:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Bencherlite. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. BencherliteTalk 07:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Done, I think. I've also taken the opportunity to tidy-up Portal/Directory (no more wikified dates!), congratulated the co-noms and notified the Signpost.  BencherliteTalk 08:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. I've also chased the nominator on Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Bolivia. BencherliteTalk 08:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Done US. As for congratulations, if you leave me to do the hard work, then allow me some of the fun as well! Nothing stopping you from putting your own congratulations - you can just remove the "on behalf of Cirt" comment from my sig. BencherliteTalk 08:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: FYI
Thank you for leeting me now that 56[disruptive username] is actually a bammed editor. For now, FACs are save, for good. ۞  Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  03:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Solar cable
I improved the article just the day before it was removed. And i believe I can improve it further. Can u please help me get the page how it was when it was deleted, so I can improve it in my userpage and resubmit it? Suraj T  06:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Cirt, in my opinion your deletion was a little hasty. The article when deleted was very different from when I nominated it and I had withdrawn my delete just prior to your close of the discussion.  There were no deletes from anybody else subsequent to the article improvements.  At the very least the AfD should have been held open a little longer to give others a chance to comment on what was esssentially a different article.  Spinning  Spark  14:48, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

✅, now at User:Surajt88/Solar cable. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks Spinningspark and cirt. I'll do my best to improve the article and restore it. Cheers Suraj  T  16:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

ItsLassieTime
Just thought I'd stop by to tell you that the ItsLassieTime situation has been ongoing in my life for over six months, and I've had enough of it. The continual socking is also ongoing. When I realized who 56*** was, I decided to take myself away from your review. I would however suggest that you try to find some publishing industry sources, something from Publisher's Weekly or the like, to nail down print-runs, promotions, and sales. Sometimes I'm successful finding such information at Accessmylibrary. For whatever this is worth. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll try that, thanks! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

New Essay: SEOBOMB that you may be interested in
I saw this come across and thought you might want to provide your thoughts, as I did, at WP:VPP. Thanks Hasteur (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with most of your comment, diff, regarding your characterization of this page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

SARAH-LOUISE YOUNG
Sarah-Louise Young.....

Beside being so beautiful, Sarah's talent in ALL the fields of endevour is truly amazing. In the event of a trip to Los Angeles, I wish to interview her and the work in which she is now (or then) currently involved. My 20 years as a music biz exec (now retired) may be able to be of some help. Somehow I'd like her to get my IP addy.

R.L.??TILDES?? NOT ON MY COMP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.52.91 (talk) 07:44, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not able to help with this. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration

 * Might be interested if it intersects with topics of Supreme Court of the United States and/or Freedom of speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Heads up
Just a heads up, Mickeymouse14 and EleanorShone look like socks of Hobnob1996. --Gyrobo (talk) 22:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Best to report this to WP:SPI. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protect "Cody Rhodes"?
Hello Cirt, I saw you semi-protected Zack Ryder so could you consider semi-protecting Cody Rhodes as well? The article constantly gets edits changing the current theme song name despite no reliable sources publishing information on it. Also unofficial nicknames without reliable sources are constantly added to the article as well as its subsection titles. Would this be cause enough for semi-protection? Thank you. Starship.paint (talk) 03:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Best to report this to WP:RFPP. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Retrieval of deleted article Rhys O'Keeffe
Cirt, could you please retrieve the text of the article Rhys O'Keeffe for me. It was deleted on notability after he was de-listed from the Carlton Football Club without playing a game; however, he was re-drafted and is now close to playing a senior game and gaining notability. I would like to prepare the article off-line, to be uploaded quickly when and if he plays. Thank you. Aspirex (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would be most willing to provide this within a subpage of your userspace, if you so request it. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how to make subpages of things, but if you just put it into my profile page or talk page that will be fine. Thanks. Aspirex (talk) 01:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

✅, now at User:Aspirex/Rhys O'Keeffe. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers Aspirex (talk) 01:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Ed Poor 2 has been amended by the Arbitration Committee
Please see here for further details. On behalf of the arbitration committee, Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC).
 * Thanks for the notice. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi cirt
Hi i have recreated Mani Nouri article as i have asked you the persmission before. thank you in advance. --Irancinemairan (talk) 08:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Was previously deleted at Articles for deletion/Mani Nouri, deleted again. Please do not recreate without consultation and/or WP:DRV. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The article had some changes and it had no problem. I had to inform you before the recreation and i did that. I don't understand why you deleted the article instantly. If there is anything to do before recreation, please provide me with some information, consultation with who? and etc. and If it is possible please let the article be there for some time and then decide about it. Thanks. --Irancinemairan (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The version didn't really appear better or significantly different. I would be most willing to userfy a copy for you, so you can work on it within a subpage of your userspace, if you so request it. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The version is really different with more reliable sources. I also modified the career part. It would be really nice if you could give it a chance to be there and if there is anything that you think i should change or remove, i would be glad to take your advice. Because i really changed a lot for this version and i only took some of names that the last creator had put there. And what is userfy a copy and what can i do with that..? :) --Irancinemairan (talk) 05:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have provided it as a userfied copy, at User:Irancinemairan/Mani Nouri. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cirt, i saw it. But can i put it on wikipedia directly in the future? Or what should i do with it, edit it and modify it and then put it on ? Thanks again. --Irancinemairan (talk) 08:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

RfC/U
Dear Cirt, further to our recent discussions, please see Requests for comment/Cirt.

I am sorry this has become necessary. You are an immensely capable and talented editor, but I feel that your allegiance to various outside causes exceeds your allegiance to the project's mission, as defined by the Foundation; that this has compromised the project's standing; and that it has caused many editors who care very much about this project to question its integrity.

I hope this RfC/U and the discussions resulting from it will help us to move forward, will enable you to re-evaluate why you are here, and will help us get back on track to work towards the aims all of us signed up for: creating an online encyclopedia, in comradeship and mutual respect, committed to a neutral point of view, authored with respect for living persons, based on accurate distillation of high-quality sources, and devoted to the aim of giving every single person on the planet free access to the sum of all human knowledge. Best, -- J N  466  13:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I commented on a fact here. Bearian (talk) 17:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent WP:AfD needs Salting
Hi Cirt. You recently deleted a page I'd listed at Afd - WP:Articles for deletion/Craig Strong. Anyway, I'm cleaning out my watchlist and, checking out what had happen to this one, noticed that this was the fourth time this article has been deleted and then recreated - see []. Added to which it was pure WP:Spam for a guy with one IMDb credit and a real-estate business to push, I thought salting might be in order. Up to you, anyway. Thanks, Plutonium27 (talk) 23:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, with that slow rate of creation (particularly with no recreation after an AfD), and when the editor who created the last three versions,, has been inactive for two years, I wouldn't waste good salt.  But Cirt's views may differ. BencherliteTalk 00:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll defer to the wise judgment of here. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

RfC outcome of Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series
I contacted you a month ago about an AfD outcome since you were the closing administrator. Recently, the RfC I requested per your suggestion has expired after the 30 days given and I believe that there is a clear consensus to merge and redirect as I proposed. I would like to know what should I do in order to close the discussion and proceed to merge the content and redirect the article. As I am the one that proposed the merge in the first place, I feel that it might not be appropriate for me to close the discussion and I do not want to proceed until I'm sure that the process has been properly followed. So, should I proceed immediately with the merge and redirect or should I wait for some other process? Jfgslo (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I suggest requesting an uninvolved admin closer at WP:Administrators' noticeboard, per WP:Merging, box IV. See User:Shooterwalker's request at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive224. Flatscan (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the suggestion by, good idea. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks to both of you for your quick replies. Jfgslo (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

A2Billing Reference
We note you have made reference to A2Billing at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trixbox#A2Billing.

However, we note that the A2Billing link does not link anywhere. As the page maintainer, may we assist you to write some more information on A2Billing. Your help would be appreciated.

Joe Roper, A2Billing. Foxcote20 (talk) 12:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest discussing with talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, and trying to find some neutral previously uninvolved editors to discuss this with on talk pages. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The Hex Girls
What's up? I've recreated the The Hex Girls article that you deleted. I've added 5 sources to it. Hope that helps. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, doesn't really look significantly different/improved enough yet. I'd suggest working on it in userspace, I could provide you a copy of that if you want. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Really? Delete voters said things like "everything lacks verifiability with no references" so I would think adding 5 reliable sources like mainstream newspapers would be a significant improvement over zero references. You don't think so? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Improved, yes. Not really enough though. I'd suggest working on a userfied version, and I'd be more than happy to provide that for you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, well I'm not really familiar or comfortable with that. So, I guess if you as an admin think it is best to delete that article with 5 sources because people said there are zero sources, than who am I to suggest we waste any further time arguing with that kind of logic. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've provided it for you as a draft version for you to work on in your userspace, at User:Sharksaredangerous/The Hex Girls. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No thanks, I'm not interested in further wasting my time. If my adding the New York Times, LA Times, Entertainment Weekly, Hollywood Reporter, etc. isn't an improvement and doesn't counter the argument that there are "no references" than I really have no clue what I'm doing here. Go ahead and delete that one, too. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'll leave it up there for a while in case you change your mind and wish to improve it further. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No thanks, just delete it please. I'm not wasting any more time on it. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. Feel free to let me know if you want to work on it further as a userspace draft version, I'll be glad to restore it. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. You've been very helpful. Here's another idea: Could you maybe add a note beyond just "The result was delete" to Articles for deletion/The Hex Girls that maybe explains why you think adding 5 sources doesn't overcome the arguments for deletion? That would reallly help give me and other editors some useful guidance before we think about wasting all day doing periodical searches at the library in the future. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

That is now ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you've been a great help. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 19:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brilliant Disguise (Law & Order)
For Articles for deletion/Brilliant Disguise (Law & Order), you said there was no consensus. Could you please explain how there was no consensus? I'm not sure I understand how an article with no references, which is non-notable, and has no reliable veriable sources can have "no consensus." Isn't there consensus that it is not verifiable and therefore not encyclopedic? --Rajah (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, between those advocating for keep, merge, redirect, etc, there really was not much consensus there. But I'd encourage you to take further merge discussion, to the article's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

AfD of Kimberly Proctor and Kruse Wellwood articles
I notice that a few hours ago you closed the AfD Articles for deletion/Kimberly Proctor as delete; however, that AfD had two articles nominated. It also included discussion for deletion of Kruse Wellwood. I see that the AfD template is still on the Kruse Wellwood article. I assume you concluded that both articles should be deleted. Cheers, Agent 86 (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Time v. Hill
Apparently the Nixon Library does have some stuff, but the finding aid is outdated. The newer one will hopefully be emailed to me soon. I've asked them to tentatively reserve me some time to look at the materials next week, fortunately I will be in the LA area. I'm sure there will be clippings if nothing else. Nixon saved everything when it came to documents.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've just gotten the finding aid by email. Nixon saved his research, memos to fellow lawyers ... very extensive.  Of course, we can use only some of it, but I'll go through it at the Nixon Library on Monday.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, great, I'll get going on creating a page with some secondary sources. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I doubt there will be much by way of images that we can use but perhaps I can scan the cover of the brief, which was certainly not copyrighted.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've been spending some time this afternoon reading through some of Nixon's file in the Hill case. Most interesting indeed.  The case eventually settled after the NY Ct of Appeals was reversed by the nine, and there's a memorandum about how much the plaintiffs got, which was not publicly announced, I scanned that for our use (around $60K each, which was probably the equivalent of a half mil today).  Not much by the way of images, but as I said, the brief covers can be used.  They were published pre 1978 without copyright notice.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thought I had something interesting, a letter from Stanley Reed to Nixon congratulating him on his argument, on SCOTUS stationary. But Reed was retired, so it wasn't improper (there was a letter from Nixon which prompted it).--Wehwalt (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Update: Still working on a draft page to create, got three good sources for some initial background. Just gotta flesh it out a bit more. Also working on the infobox formatting, which is unique for Supreme Court of the United States cases. Will post it soon. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Draft Page - The Futuristics
Hi Cirt,

I was hoping you could review the recent source addition I made to my draft page below. The article I added is a reliable source that references The Futuristics so I'm hoping I can make it a public article. Please let me know if this is OK. Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DerekAC7/The_Futuristics

New source: http://www.djbooth.net/index/tracks/review/game-pot-of-gold/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerekAC7 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hrm, does not really look yet like enough secondary source coverage. Also, it'd be easier to analyze if the references were formatted. Try reading WP:CITE and using WP:CIT templates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok will do thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.155.161 (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Lady Gaga: Queen of Pop
Cirt, I do think it needs a little protection, seeing the slow vandalism that's been going on. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I requested it, at WP:RFPP. We'll see. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Page protection
Hello. Would you be able to unlock the page Just Kait, so a redirect can be created for Kaitlyn DiBenedetto? thanks. Tinton5 (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Best to request at WP:RFPP. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Good article question
Hey Cirt. I was referred to you by User:Drmies. I have a quick question about good articles. I had two good articles up for good article nomination, which were Who We Are (Lifehouse album) and First Time (Lifehouse song). They were failed by User:Mattchewbaca in bad faith as you can see at: Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents. Do you think I should renominate both of these articles for a second good article nomination or have it as a first nomination since the review by Mattchewbaca was in bad faith? Thanks. - Rp0211  <sup style="color:#CCCCCC"> (talk2me)  01:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest posting this question to a new section at WT:GAN. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Why delete Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine
Why did you delete the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine page? Please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.219.133 (talk) 01:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Deleted through WP:AFD process, discussion was at Articles for deletion/Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Immunome Research
Perhaps it does have OTRS permission, but it is still an advert no? - F ASTILY  (TALK) 05:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's for the normal Wikipedia community processes to determine. Feel free to take appropriate further steps. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * My thoughts:
 * Regarding User:Fastily's comment, I have restored the CSD tag that the author removed. I left a note on the author's talk page, recommending that he follow the process and not delete CSD tags from his own article.
 * Regarding the article itself, my inclination with a new article is generally to do what I can to clean it up to meet minimal standards, e.g., James H. Lincoln. When an article, such as Immunome Research has so many strikes against it, I am hard pressed to know where to start other than delete it and recreate a stub from scratch (assuming it meets the appropriate notability guidelines):
 * Promotional in tone and content
 * Essentially a copy/paste from the website
 * Written by someone with an admitted conflict of interest: "s the author is associated with the journal being discussed ... as the first scientific journal in the field of Immunomics, it seems relevant to include the journal in the encyclopedia"
 * I'm not sure it even merits inclusion in WP:JOURNALS - it is not peer reviewed (so far as I can see), and doesn't have any paper distribution (admittedly, not a sole factor for exclusion).
 * If CSD is declined, I'll nominate it at WP:AFD. Either it is worthy of someone spending time to cleanup (I don't think so, at this point), or it is not.
 * Cheers, JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking a little deeper, the following makes me think the Journal in question is notable. It is just that the current article is a promotional piece, as written:.

Copied the foregoing to Talk:Immunome Research, as this seems a better place to continue this discussion about the article. I hope this is OK. JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The above plan sounds appropriate, no objections. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Immunome Research
Howdy. Which ticket can I reference for this? Regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh it's this one . &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * From time to time... I miss the obvious. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, no worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:50, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

re: barnstar
Thanks a lot! It's great to see work appreciated :) --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Cyprus Conflict Resolution Trainers Group
Dear Cirt Could you please restore the content of the above page in my user space? I intend to provide reliable sources regarding the significance of this group in creating a peace movement on the island of Cyprus. I also intend to merge its content with another article on Wikipedia, which discussed a major activity of this group. Maryafrika (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Maryafrika/Cyprus Conflict Resolution Trainers Group. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Cirt, thank you very much for restoring the content of the above page in my user space. I have now completed the edits and moved the article. I would greatly appreciate if you invest a moment to review it and let me know if you think it needs more work. Maryafrika (talk) 07:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Mondlango
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mondlango. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiwaxia (talk • contribs)
 * Thanks for the notice. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Ron Ritzman (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

FPoC London Transport
Dear Cirt, I'm not sure why you need help closing FPo discussions and carrying out the promotion steps - you are, after all, a FPo director and the list of closing instructions is quite clear. In fact, you left your message more than 24 hours after I last edited, and more than 48 hours have passed since then, which is hardly an ideal situation. From my watchlist, I see that the portal's nominator has made a start on finishing your half-started job, which is good of him but not something that he should have to do. I would have thought that it would have been sensible either to ask me first whether I wanted to help do your job for you, or do the job yourself once you realised that I hadn't edited for some time after your message. However, as I note that you're not online at the moment (perhaps because of July 4, I know not) I'll see what steps still need doing and finish off for you. Perhaps next time you might want to ask your fellow FPo director to assist if I'm not online. I'm not annoyed, by the way, just slightly puzzled. Regards, BencherliteTalk 11:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact, DavidCane had done all the steps required. I'll let you leave him a note of congratulations/thanks in due course. Regards, BencherliteTalk 11:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification about this. I'd seen in the past that you were quite happy for me or other featured portal directors to perform some steps, and for you to carry out others. Your view appears to have changed. As far as timing, don't see it as a urgent process, or an emergency, or a crisis, for some steps to not be done for a short period of time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact, OhanaUnited has never asked me to clerk his closures for him - only you have done, and there are no other FPo Directors. I don't mind helping every so often, and I have done a good deal of tidying up of pages connected to the FPo processes without being asked, but asking me to finish your to-do list seemingly every time you promote a portal is perhaps unusual behaviour for a FxC director.  (Also you're increasing the number of steps you leave for me e.g. in February it was only the last step you wanted me to do because you found it "annoying", this time it was nearly everything.)  I think that it's the closer's responsibility to take the necessary steps, whether at FPoC or elsewhere (and, for the record, I have closed discussions at FPoC and FSC, and FLC a long time ago, so I speak from experience: all of them have a number of annoying aspects!)
 * As for whether or not it's urgent to take all the necessary steps, obviously urgent/emergency/crisis are all relative terms (and are all your words, not mine) but if you don't leave a note on the nomination that it has been closed as successful, and don't complete all the other steps, people may be confused as to what is going on until the bot processes the close and adds the star - see this question from Tony1 after I had left a message for the Signpost team about this portal's promotion. Regards, BencherliteTalk 15:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ideally it would be best for a bot to perform all steps except for the first 2. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I know, there's a fair amount of tedious stuff there... Would User:GimmeBot be able to add any to its "to-do" list? Incidentally, I'll be quite happy to take all the steps necessary when I close P:SCOTUS as successful, as I anticipate being in a position to do in due course after you nominate it... no need for you to promote it yourself if I'm around! BencherliteTalk 15:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Will ask. And thanks! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Arif Khan Page
Why did you delete the following page: Arif_Khan_(politician) ???

He's the upcoming candidate for an Alberta riding in the next provincial election, and the public needs to know this information. I included three external references, what more do you need?

Thanks, -- Jasen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasenator (talk • contribs) 16:12, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Was deleted through WP:AFD process, after discussion at Articles for deletion/Arif Khan (politician). &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Security Now drv
I was going to start a drv for this article but I noticed first line is to discuss with deleting admin. Two issues with this deletion, one is that I believe it to be notable, however that is up for debate if I had a chance to comment. I have this article on my watch list however no changes had made other that deletion in the recent period. I suspect therefore the article did NOT have an AFD tag on it, and thus there was no AFD discussion. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. Restored. Relisted. Back at AFD. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * my apology. I see it was tagged for AFD on June 27th. So I guessed I missed that. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sheri Fink (children's author)
Hi

I think you may have missed The Little Rose when you closed this one. Mtking (talk) 02:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Holla atcha!
How are you doing Cirt? Hey can you give me a list of the Savage books, for which I haven't given you the Book sales? Sorry for being late. — <i style"color:blue">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 05:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not editing those articles anymore. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration Notification
Hello, due to recent events a request for arbitration has been filed by regarding long standing issues in the "Cult" topic area. The request can be found at Arbitration/Requests/Case The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 07:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The Hex Girls again
What's up? As you might recall we had a previous discussion about your close of Articles for deletion/The Hex Girls as delete. To reiterate, I thought that in light of the sources I'd found and added to the article, that concerns about lack of sources had been met and "the most drastic action needed here is at most maybe a merge to another Scooby-Doo related article, but certainly not complete deletion." However, other editors and yourself disagreed and thought deletion was the best outcome and you deleted it. But I see today that some other editor(s) has merged Hex Girls information into List of Scooby-Doo characters. My first instinct after seeing this was to turn the The Hex Girls article you deleted into a redirect to List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters and then improve upon the section there, however I can see how that could be seen as disregarding the AFD consensus since this recommendation was rejected there, and I can see how this could turn into another gigantic waste of my time after it all gets deleted again. So, I thought I'd come here first and ask: Do you have a problem with me turning The Hex Girls into a redirect of List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters and improving that section? That is, can I now go ahead and work on my recommendation to "merge to another Scooby-Doo related article" even though that suggestion was rejected? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest you start a new section at the talk page of List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters to address that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:08, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you going to address my question there? My question is pretty specific to you: Do you have a problem with this? Are you going to delete that redirect if I create it? Are you going to delete work I'm considering putting into List_of_Scooby-Doo_characters? Sharksaredangerous (talk) 17:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * My answer is nope to all those things, I don't have a problem with it, I won't delete it the redirect, or your work. But it's an editorial decision at this point, and can only be helped by having discussion at Talk:List of Scooby-Doo characters. Good luck! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 19:42, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Discrete Green's theorem and Antiderivative theorem
I see that you closed the deletion discussion for Discrete Green's theorem. However, the article still exists under the title of Antiderivative theorem. The author of the first changed its title multiple times during the AfD hoping to satisfy those who complained that he had, personally, coined the term "Discrete Green's theorem". Justin W Smith talk/stalk 20:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Helferich Clarke FAR
Hi Cirt - I know this was a long time ago, but the FAR you began for Rebecca Helferich Clarke appears to be wrapping up. If you have any final comments, they would be appreciated. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Static latching
You deleted Static Latching per WP:Articles for deletion/Static Latching. Unfortunately, subsequent to being nominated for deletion, the article was moved to Static latching. You deleted the redirect page, but not the actual article that was the subject of the deletion discussion. Can you address this? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Cheers!

Bearian (talk) 16:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC) <br style="clear: both"/>
 * Thank you! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Deborah Presley Brando Article
Hello! You have deleted a page entitled "Deborah Presley Brando", she was married to Christian Brando, elder child of actor Marlon Brando. here is an internal link to her husband Christian, where you can see it's talking about her in the marriage section. Christian_Brando, Christian_Brando Could we start an article about her based on that? thx Antonio --Antoniomecheri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniomecheri (talk • contribs) 23:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

How do you request it?thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniomecheri (talk • contribs) 01:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Antoniomecheri/Deborah Presley Brando. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

So why is she mentioned on wikipedia's Christian Brando's article, in the content "marriage and spousal abuse?", that could be considered as nonsense too! and she has a million "mainstream media" good and verifiable sources all over Print and internet. what makes someone notable? Her claim was overturned by the Tenessee courts from non illigitimate to illigitimate but without inheritance rights. please, do your homework before concluding. thx — Also, you have a page about Bonnie Lee Bakley, which was the wife of Robert Blake, Bonnie_Lee_Bakley,Bonnie_Lee_Bakley who based on your arguments she does not qualify as notable by marriage, (same case as Deborah Presley Brando)!!! or by inheritance, but yet you have a page of her ??? why are you discriminating here? a similar article can be written about Deborah, yet she is more notable than Bonnie, that i can tell you. check it out!---Antoniomecheri (talk) 01:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest you read through WP:NOTE, WP:BLP, WP:RS, and WP:V - as well as WP:Article development and WP:CITE. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, --Antoniomecheri (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Note to self - films about Freedom of Speech
Some interesting films about Freedom of Speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:12, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) The First Amendment Project
 * 2) The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
 * 3) The People vs. Larry Flynt
 * 4) Gideon's Trumpet (film)
 * 5) Obscene (2007 documentary)

Freedom of speech - Userbox idea, possible WikiProject idea
Userbox idea, possible WikiProject idea. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Freedom of speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) WikiProject
 * 2) WikiProject Council
 * 3) WikiProject Council/Guide
 * 4) WikiProject Council/Proposals

ActionTrip Wiki Page Inquiry
Hello,

This is the first time I am writing to you directly. I'd like to say that I see no reason why you would remove the wiki page for ActionTrip.com. The terms some of your admins/editors used to describe ActionTrip.com were "completely unreferenced" and "Just some website with no independent reliable sources." There's clearly some unfounded doubt about credibility here. In response to this, I've offered some of examples of our long history - numerous quotes, links to features, and such, just to give you a rough idea of what the site is about.

- A news excerpt from BioWare's official site for Mass Effect 3! Here's the URL - http://www.bioware.com/archive/mass-effect-3

Quote: 02.14.2011   Mass Effect 3 is Most Wanted by Action Trip The fans over at Action Trip were asked to name the games they are most excited for in 2011. The game that came in first? Mass Effect 3! Here's the URL to our voting poll - http://www.actiontrip.com/polls.phtml?showpoll=133

- Next, a quote on Bethesda's official web site for Fallout 3 - ActionTrip: "Molding together the retro-style tactical mechanics from Fallout and action-oriented gameplay is no easy task. For now, it all works rather well." - the is from our 2008 E3 Coverage (http://www.actiontrip.com/features/e32008fallout3.phtml).

- Two quotes on BioWare's official web site for Dragon Age Origins here's the URL - http://dragonage.bioware.com/dao/home/accolades/

Action Trip - 2009 Reader's Choice Game of the Year "With a well-written storyline, great atmosphere and old-school RPG gameplay, this title justifies every penny of its $60 price tag."

Action Trip - 2009 Reader's Choice Game of the Year "The game has all the elements you need to immerse yourself in an interesting new fantasy setting."

ActionTrip's comics garnerned tremendous attention, on various topics. Here are some of our successful comics.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/14/weekly-webcomic-wrapup-is-mourning-cathy/ http://wow.joystiq.com/tag/action-trip/

These are just a few examples. Comics were generally a great success and now have a history on AT. We've been posting them for over seven years. Our Warcraft-related comics were also acknowledged both by Blizzard and WoW fans. Here's another example of a successful AT Comic, which was drawn for a competition for Alienware - http://www.futuremark.com/community/competitions/comicstripcompetition/

ActionTrip comics are also featured regularly on MMORPG.com (in the comics section - http://www.mmorpg.com/comics.cfm). In addition, Kotaku.com - one of the most popular video game blogs today - includes our comics in their Sunday Comics update - http://kotaku.com/sunday-comics. Here's an older update, just so you know we've been included in their comics section for a long time - http://kotaku.com/5317186/sunday-comics

On wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_IV - Play.tm has given the game its "Action game of the Year" award for 2008.

- Action Trip has given the game its "Action game of the Year" award for 2008. - MTV Game Awards has given the game its "Game of the Year" award for 2008.

References in the world of warcraft wiki page:

^ a b c Matt Leyendecker (2004-12-01). "World of Warcraft Review". ActionTrip. Retrieved 2008-06-25. - World of Warcraft wiki page linking to our review of World of Warcraft.

ActionTrip reviews have been included and quoted on prominent sites such as Gamerankings.com and Metacritic.com We've also been known to appear in Kotaku's Frankereview - http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/frankenreview-halo-3-o-d-s-t/ Gamespot also lists us on their web site - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/haloreach/review.html?mode=web

ActionTrip has also covered major events such as the E3 and Games Convetion in Leipzig (now in Koln), Germany. And has recievied plenty of media coverage from other various publications; quotes from industry veterans such as Gabe Newell were taken from AT - http://www.actiontrip.com/features/gc2007gabenewellinterview.phtml

Similar features on AT include talking to influential people in the industr such as the creator of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed - http://www.actiontrip.com/previews/360/star-wars-the-force-unleashed_i.phtml

One of the most important things you should be aware of is that ActionTrip.com has been a part of the gaming community for over 10 years. We have a solid fan base and respectable traffic. Our success has been acknowledged in 2005, when we were purchased by one of the larger US-based ad sales rep firms, Gorilla Nation (now Evolve Media). The site eventually grew into a multi-million monthly page view operation. The regularly updated ActionTrip Facebook page has 3,420 "likes" at present.

To cut I long story short, the deleted Wiki page for ActionTrip.com was submitted by a devoted fan and we quite liked it. Even so, I respectfully ask you to reconsider and allow me to submit a brand new Wiki Page for ActionTrip. Note that this message is just to give you an idea of what we've done over the years. So, once again, I ask you to allow me to submit a new Wiki page for AT.

Best regards, Ure "Vader" Paul Senior Editor, ActionTrip.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ure Vader Paul (talk • contribs) 14:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The deletion discussion was at Articles for deletion/ActionTrip. I think the best course of action now, would be to place a userfied copy in a subpage of your userspace, so you can work on it, as a proposed draft version, in order to attempt to satisfy WP:NOTE. I'm perfectly happy to do that for you, if you so request it. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to reply, Cirt. Yes, that sounds good. Let's set up this page and I'd very much appreciate it if you do that. Just so, we're clear on this, this means that you'll copy the old AT Wiki Page and then allow me to edited it on my user page. Is that correct? Ure Vader Paul (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Ure Vader Paul/ActionTrip. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, Cirt, as agreed I've created a draft version, re-edited the content, and it's very much ready to go - User:Ure Vader Paul/ActionTrip. I hope it meets with Wiki's approval. Let me know when it's up as the official ActionTrip Wiki Page. Oh and I'd like to include a logo (small pic) for ActionTrip in the Infobox, if at all possible. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 12:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

No, there are still sects that have zero sources at all. Also, please format the cites with WP:CIT templates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I'll see what I can do about that. Thanks for your time and patience. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, I've tried to add as many references as I possibly could. Please let me know, if some specific information still doesn't meet your requirements. If the section "Other Features" is the problem, I can edit that out. Ure Vader Paul (talk) 01:42, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Not satisfactory, as per my prior comment. Still has wholly unreferenced sects. Still has cites that should be formatted, please read WP:CITE and use WP:CIT templates. Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Employment Law Alliance
Hi Cirt,

I am writing you in the hope that you will undelete the entry Employment Law Alliance. My reasoning is based on several issues: 1) Page in question was recently brought into compliance with respect to the addition of numerous third-party references both a) confirming the identity of the organization; and b) highlighting polls done by the organization which, in and of themselves, meet the definition of notable. 2) If you review the page's content you will see that no content is intended to be promotional or construed as an advertisement. This organization is identical in nature to that of an alliance of airlines such as the Star alliance. Timestaking efforts to ensure that the page was in compliance were made. A claim that somehow this is similar to a situation where "a sells concrete and b pours it" overly simplistic. By this logic, when Delta sells a plane ticket and a person flies on a partner airline then a similar situation occurs. And yet, Delta's airline alliance page is not called in to question. Please reconsider this deletion. Mabond17 (talk) 23:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cirt,

You plan sounds good and I greatly appreciate your willingness to work with me on this. I apologize for my ignorance, but what do I need to do to userfy the page? I was looking on the entry for userfy and it seemed to indicate that you, as an administrator, could do it. Please lte me know. Thanks again. Mabond17 (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Mabond17/Employment Law Alliance. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Note to self - books about Freedom of Speech
A few intriguing books on Freedom of Speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment, by Anthony Lewis
 * 2) Freedom, Technology, and the First Amendment, by Jonathan W. Emord
 * 3) Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting our First Amendment Liberties, by Christopher M. Fairman
 * 4) Contested Words: Legal Restrictions on Freedom of Speech in Liberal Democracies, by Ian Cram
 * 5) The First Amendment in Cross-Cultural Perspective: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Freedom of Speech, by Ronald J. Krotoszynski
 * Added some more. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

knomo article
Hi there, I had messaged 2 other wiki administrators for help with this page and had no response and i see you have deleted the page i constructed for knomo. i spent hours and hours improving the tone and trying to find citations that make the page notable and verifiable etc and was hoping for more direction from the admins as everything seemed to be in-line with the Wiki rules - is there anything i can do to get the page back? Could you advise what was still needing to be remedied after all the changes i made previously? Many thanks in advance for any help you can give Caroline Mackay (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to provide a copy within a subpage of your userspace, so you can work on a proposed draft version to try to satisfy WP:NOTE - if you request that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiProjects - related to Freedom of speech and Freedom of the press

 * 1) WikiProject Human rights
 * 2) WikiProject Internet
 * 3) WikiProject Journalism
 * 4) WikiProject Law
 * 5) WikiProject Media
 * 6) WikiProject Politics
 * 7) WikiProject United States Public Policy
 * 8) WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases
 * WikiProjects - related to Freedom of speech and Freedom of the press. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Day Pitney LLP
Hi Cirt,

I am hoping that you can userfy a copy of the Day Pitney article that was deleted January 25, 2011. I would like the opportunity to improve the content so that it's in compliance with Wikipedia's content policies.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tabajek (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC) tabajek
 * ✅, now at User:Tabajek/Day Pitney. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Pharmex Rom Industry
Hi Cirt,

can you please send me a page that was deleted by you few days ago about "Pharmex Rom Industry". I would really apreacheate any comment. this is my mail: davidbenshimon@gmail.com

thanks, david — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.211.45 (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I'd suggest you first create an account on Wikipedia. Then, you could have a userfied copy, within a subpage of your userspace. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

MW
FYI The Mister World article went to AFD and you recently closed the AFD but the articles arising from the main article still remained. If the main article (Mister World) was deleted is it okay for the subarticles to exist in wiki (ie: Mister World 1996, Mister World 1998, Mister World 2000, Mister World 2003, Mister World 2007, Mister World 2010? --Arielle Leira (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You should probably bundle all those into another AFD. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Freedom of speech - additional related articles
&mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Free Speech Coalition
 * 2) Free Speech Radio News
 * 3) Free Speech Movement
 * 4) Free Speech TV
 * 5) SPEECH Act of 2010

AfD
Please see: Articles for deletion/Dan Millice. BigJim707 (talk) 04:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Created new article on US Supreme Court case = Time, Inc. v. Hill
I have created a new article on the U.S. Supreme Court case, Time, Inc. v. Hill. Feedback and especially help with additional research would be appreciated, at the new article's talk page. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Time, Inc. v. Hill

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Liberty (2nd nomination)‎
This AfD was just reopened and relisted yesterday by the previously closing admin per discussion here and here. It's drawn exactly one new comment. None of the existing keep !votes states a policy basis, which was the reason it was reopened. I think you should undo this close. Msnicki (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. Restored AFD tag to page. Relisted AFD. Back at AFD. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Msnicki (talk) 13:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does this guy keep getting this relisted? Just because he doesn't like the outcome? Please, experienced editors have weighed in for keeping it - just close the thing and move on already - this constant closing and reopening based on the complaints of the one editor is getting ridiculous. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's most likely to not be deleted anyways. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly - it's been closed twice now as "keep" - let's close it for good and be done with it. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, therefore no harm will come from more discussion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

View by Macwhiz
How do you feel about the RFC views by Macwhiz? I think it would be helpful for you to post a specific, point by point response either accepting or denying criticisms and stating what you would do differently going forward. This process will work best if you remain engaged. Jehochman Talk 14:37, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As there is now an ongoing RFAR, it seems more appropriate to respond there. I've gone ahead and done so, diff. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Request
Hi, i would like to add the five FBI audio files to the following section of the 1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot article. However, i am not quite certain about what the appropriate template for multiple audio files would be. I would appreciate it if you would help me out in this regard. The accompanying caption should be as follows: "Conversations between Rajneeshpuram mayor Swami Krishna Deva and John Mathis, a mediator with the federal Community Relations Service; recorded by the FBI in the fall of 1984. In these phone intercepts, the mayor pleads with Mathis to provide details about a secret federal investigation. The "Geraldine" referred to in these tapes is Geraldine Thompson, the chief of staff for Oregon governor Victor G. Atiyeh."
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Rajneeshee_assassination_plot#Investigation

Thanks. Joyson Noel Holla at me!  07:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Can this discussion take place at the article's talk page? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 08:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Moved discussion to talk page. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  09:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

José Filipe Torres deleted page.
Hey!

I'm cheking out information about Bloom Consulting, and just saw that page about owner Jose Filipe Torres had been deleted now for three times, I already read all arguments why it had been done and now situation is changed, he is worldwide knewed person, there is a lot of articles about him and his company, it would be usuful to add information about him in wikipedia, if only it's possible to undelete it, to make it work again, or maybe it's possible to make new page about him? What you suggest?

Best regards, Marta Martaliepa (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It was deleted after the process described at WP:AFD, through discussion at Articles for deletion/José Filipe Torres. I'd be most happy to userfy the content for you to a subpage of your userspace, so you make work on a proposed draft version to try to satisfy WP:NOTE. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But if it's not me who wants add the content to page, I just want to make page work again, or it should be me who add also content...if I understand correctly I should put tag WP:NOTE and then you can verify the content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martaliepa (talk • contribs) 16:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, unfortunately the prior content was deemed unsatisfactory of the guidelines at WP:NOTE. No, tagging the deleted page won't help really. You can either work on the page yourself as a draft proposed version in your userspace, or perhaps post to talk pages of related WikiProjects for help. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But maybe it's possible to make just new page, but with the same title? Or it doesn't work like this? Martaliepa (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Really best to first work on it as a proposed draft version, not yet in main article space. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I think I get idea, I will try to do that.. if smth I will be back here :) Thank you for information. Martaliepa (talk) 16:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Martaliepa/José Filipe Torres. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing the issues; I tried as noted at my talk page. Bearian (talk) 00:10, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much for information and good luck with your works ;) Martaliepa (talk) 10:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Assistance, Please.
Can you please block 50.9.109.170 (talk) from the Cheney Mason article. Evidently, from what I gather, he removed the unfavorable fact of Mason's having allegedly extended his middle finger in an obscene manner, as photographed by an AP photographer, upon the acquittal of his client, Casey Anthony in the infamous murder trial; I just attempted to restore this, which involves the work of another user, but I'm afraid he'll remove it again. It's an infamous incident, and it needs to stay in here. Can you perhaps also lock the article, as I'm afraid it may be subject to further loss/vandalism; I'm a newbie, so I don't know how to do it. Diligent007 (talk) 05:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest reporting this to WP:AIV. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Supreme Court of the United States at Featured Portal candidates
Portal:Supreme Court of the United States is a candidate for Featured Portal, with discussion at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Supreme Court of the United States. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Portal:Supreme Court of the United States

Kathy Chitty
Hi Cirt,

Because I wasn't paying attention, the article regarding Kathy Chitty was nominated for deletion and then deleted. If I had noticed I would have put up a reasonable argument to keep it. It was nominated for deletion a year ago but kept. I feel that the points made then along with an up to date aurgument to keep it would probably have kept it. Is is a reasonable request ot have it reinstated and continue the debate? Thanks for your time. Rickedmo (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, thanks for that and thanks for the offer to userfy the article.

Over the last year the article had been edited quite a bit to get a balance between some (I think) noteworthy information about one of Paul Simon's muses who is mentioned in four of his songs, and protecting the current privacy of the muse. Some of the articles regarding the songs themselves had links to the Kathy Chitty article which are now broken. I could, of course, include the background information on the inspiration of the songs in the individual song articles, but as there are a number of songs - I think four - that refer to her, it seems the wrong way round to repeat the relavant information regarding Ms Chitty in each article - it seems more sensible to have an article about her that can be linked to. I can develop this argument further if required and would have done if I'd been paying attention when the article was nominated for deletion. I don't think the quality of the article was the main challenge, but the notability. I strongly feel she is sufficiently notable. Regards and thanks for your time. Rickedmo (talk) 12:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand, and I am giving you an opportunity to further improve the article, to add that information into it, improve its sourcing and references, etc. You are of course free to make your own decisions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, thanks for that. Please userfy the article on Kathy Chitty. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 18:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Rickedmo/Kathy Chitty. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, many thanks. I've had a read through the lastest verson, as deleted, and will make a few minor changes and search out some more references, but I can't see me making dramatic changes. But anyway, I'll do my best before reinstating it. Thanks again. Rickedmo (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Block evasion
Hi, Cirt, and thank you for putting a 31-hour block on the edit-warring anon IP 205.209.83.211. He now appears to be making the same contentious edits (which more than one editor has been reverting) under the name Worstcook (talk).

Worstcook's list of contributions mirrors that of 205.209.83.211, and here is one example of an identical edit and a near-identical edit summary:


 * Worstcook Revision as of 22:12, 12 July 2011, summary: "(→Contestants: Please keep consistent with first season)"


 * 205.209.83.211 Revision as of 00:47, 12 July 2011, summary: "(→Contestants: Make an episode chart also keep consistent with first season.)"

While I can open a sockpuppet investigation, I thought I'd check in with you first, since I know admins take a dim view of editors trying to evade blocks. Thank you for any help. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Just a word of support for Tenebrae's contentions. This account has been around for quite a while, but rarely used.  A couple hours after you blocked the IP, it went active, and went right to List of The Great Food Truck Race episodes, the episode list for one of the articles the IP had been working on most actively.  What's most noticeable is what's missing from both editors edits: edit summaries.  Drmargi (talk) 02:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:SPI is probably the best way to go from here. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks for steering this in the right direction. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Mark Gilmartin
Hello - I would like a second attempt at writing an article for Mark Gilmartin. It says you were the deleting admin. Please let me know what further action needs to be taken on my part, if applicable. Thank you very much. Joyprice7 (talk) 18:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at User:Joyprice7/Mark Gilmartin. You can work on it there, to further improve it, as a proposed draft version. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank You (Amanda Lear song) - deleted page
Well, that article was far from perfect, right, but you should have redirected it to Amanda Lear or Amanda Lear discography.1000MHz (talk) 01:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh you can feel free to do that, no worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

OTRS question
Is the ticket 1159711711597103101 about the image File:Littleboots (6).jpg? Just answer yes or no, because the description given seems like an e-mail sent to their system. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  02:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry I'm not able to see that ticket. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:39, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of article "Railway Electrification, New Jalpaiguri" from Wikipedia
Kindly see this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Railway_Electrification,_New_Jalpaiguri

I feel that decision to delete the article was not appropriate. You have not shown your identity on your user page.

I hope that motives behind deletion were professional and genuine without any ulterior/malafide intentions.

I hope that you have not acted on complaint from private individuals or government authorities.

Quite strangely, Indian Government Authorities have initiated disciplinary proceedings and investigation on alleged financial irregularities committed by one of the person mentioned in the article during his previous assignments

223.180.139.20 (talk) 08:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest you first create an account on Wikipedia. Then, I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

About "Neuttro"
Is an active recognized band, by criteria you need one reference right??? if i put at least one reliable reference can be accepted?? btw i think everything was good redacted and no, I am no part of that band but I am an expert of Puertorican Rock. Thanks in advance Mroxidizer1 (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2011 (UTC)MrOxidizer1
 * Brought it to the community for subsequent discussion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

number
You have 54th place in most edits (142528). Nice! Probably changed by the time you read this. Here:  A   user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.  23:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Work (book)
You deleted my article, Work (book), due to concerns of the notability of the subject. That was the right call at the time, but now I believe it is time to have a more thorough discussion about this. At least 1000 copies of the book have been shipped, and probably several times that figure if distribution of Crimethinc's other books is any indication. It is available on Amazon, and a well-known artist did the cover art. On Wikipedia, it is better to err on the side of including something versus not including it when it comes to notability issues. I think the article should be restored. --SuperEditor (talk) 17:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (from TPS:) The mere existence of a book in its own right is not enough for notability (and 1000 copies is a lot for a book of poems, but not a lot for many other books). Reviews in reputable publications are a good indication of notability, though. Please see WP:NBOOKS for our guidelines on notability for books. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, nice cover--reminds me of Joost Swarte's work. Drmies (talk) 21:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Pettidee
I was looking for the page on Pettidee and it appears to have been deleted. I believe I can repair this page to make it meet wikipedia standards. The artist is notable and has had charted albums, but it seems the articles previous editors did not do the footwork to show this. If there is any way I can get the last known text emailed to me that would be great. Thanks.Reesrodgers (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (From TPS:) I made you a sandbox, User:Reesrodgers/Pettidee. Good luck; you got your work cut out for you. ;) Drmies (talk) 02:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks !! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Craze Productions
I would like to request the re-openiong and un-deletion of the article you deleted in November, 2010, Craze Productions. Though there were very few references on the page back then, I now have many sources of information, and there is even a Wiki article that references the company ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G#Warren_G_Week_and_In_the_Mid-Nite_Hour ). Please get back to me about un-deleting the page, and allow me to add the new references and sources, in order to expand the realm of Wikipedia. Thank you Aykleinman (talk) 02:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Mercury grove
I think you forgot to delete the page... :) Singularity42 (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I did, I guess it just didn't go through, thanks! Now, ✅!!! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo
Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466/Evidence. Please add your evidence by, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 06:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please bring back earlier history of this previously deleted page
About the rapper Ya Boy. Someone recreated it after the AFD; I edited that page back in 2008 or so and can dig up the sources for notability from there. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The Psychology of The Simpsons
I put in the reassessment. I don't now how do this and I put this page here. Only you must look for information about the background and I retire tihs page. Botedance (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Chin up!
I notice your edits have gone dark since July 21. Hopefully you're on vacation and not depressed or sulking. You're one of the best content-creators at WP, bar none, and an intelligent and rational closer at AfD. Don't let the mass of chickenshit editing complaints being stacked up at ArbCom by a small handful of detractors get to you. We need you, maaaaaaaan. xoxo, —tim Carrite (talk) 07:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Young Living Essential Oils
I am inquiring about a possible reinstatement of a deleted page or some additional information about why this page was chosen for removal and what content or lack thereof constituted this modification. I would like to get this company listed in Wikipedia as it is in a similar category to the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monavie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xango http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahitian_Noni

When I search for the term "Young Living Essential Oils" I was directed to a page that refers to the below listed article and asks that I contact the admin of this page for additional questions: 00:09, 27 January 2011 Cirt (talk | contribs) deleted "Young Living Essential Oils" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Living Essential Oils)

Is there any help that you can provide? Thanks Tleydsman (talk) 21:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Tony Leydsman
 * I'd be more than willing to userfy a copy of the article for you, so you can work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace - if you so request it. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you please provide me a copy of the article so I can work on a proposed draft version? Thank youTleydsman (talk) 16:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC) Tleydsman

Any luck on the original copy? Tleydsman (talk) 22:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Giovanni Casillas
Giovani Daniel Casillas Chávez o Giovani Casillas (4 de enero de 1994, Guadalajara, Jalisco, México) es un futbolista mexicano que juega como mediocampista en el Club Deportivo Guadalajara de la Primera División Mexicana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.60.14.136 (talk) 10:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleted Page
Hello Cirt,

I recently noticed that the page on GameSoundCon was deleted, based on your analysis of the content.

I would like to respectfully ask you to reconsider, based on a couple of points.

I would humbly request you to reconsider the use of "MIX Magazine" (online and off) to be a dubious reference. MIX has been one of music industry's leading trade magazines for at least 30 years. Although they were owned for a time by Penton Media, the magazine was separate from the PR organization. Recording schools often make sure to note if one of the grads or faculty makes it into MIX; they consider it a "big deal." For example (http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/2011/07/13/grads-featured-in-mix-magazine/ or http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/category/game-audio/), http://www.berklee.edu/bt/193/alumnotes.html, http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/CAM/faculty/meis/jermance/Pages/index.aspx. The "TEC" award, founded by MIX, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEC_Awards) is also very highly regarded in the industry.

GameSoundCon was the first public showing of the previously private tools used to develop music for the video game, Rock Band (published by MTV/Viacom). This became part of the launch of "The Rock Band Network" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Band_Network) a highly notable event. This is covered in a "gamasutra" article here: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/25015/GameSoundCon_Adds_Rock_Band_Network_Classes.php Gamasutra is the leading online resource for the entire game development community.

Your largest concern seemed (justifiably) to be about the "GamesOpt.com" reference. That was poor judgement to use a non-vetted source (especially one obviously trying to capitalize on users who make a typo when trying to find GameSpot.com). Since I knew the information to be accurate, I didn't vet rest of the site properly. There were many sites which had referenced Marty O'Donnell (Halo Composer) keynoting the kickoff conference -- I picked a bad one (at one point, Marty had it listed on his own page).

I hope you will take the above into consideration and reconsider the deletion of the page.

I hope I am using the appropriate wiki-etiquette in making this request. One of the Wiki pages on Deletion Review recommended contacting the closing administrator by way of their talk page :) Thank you for your time.

Bschmidt1962 (talk) 16:31, 4 August 2011 (UTC) Bschmidt1962 Update: I see that the above issues were primarily "OlYeller", not yours, so I've made these comments on his talk page--thank you Bschmidt1962 (talk) 16:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be most willing to userfy it for you, so you can further work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace, if you request that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

UK Wrestling Experience Mayhem
Another Deleted Page was the page "UK Wrestling Experience Mayhem". This page was information about a weekly TV program which airs on Sky television. The show gets better viewing figures according to the BARB than many other programs which seem to warrant having a page. The network which screens it has just announced they will be screening the show in a primetime slot with full commercial advertising and it will now be on 3 times a week. It has now been running for 6 months and is still the only British wrestling on television. The show features a number of top british wrestlers who are deemed relevant enough to have their own pages on here so it seems odd that the only TV show they can be seen in doesn't warrant a page. Could you please consider reinstating the page to allow people to ensure the sources used fit guidelines and the article is fully expanded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.120.39 (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You should first create a registered account on Wikipedia, and then I'd be happy to provide a copy for you as a subpage of your userspace to work on as a draft version. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Seay
You deleted this at AfD and now it has been recreated at Seay (musician). Perhaps both versions should be salted. Qworty (talk) 05:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Deleted, but you could request salt at WP:RFPP. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Feedback?
Hi Cirt. I'm hoping to nominate Moonrise (Warriors) at some point for FA, and was wondering if you would like to give me any feedback/advice on improvement and whether it's ready. Thanks,  Bramble  claw  x   22:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Have there been significant changes since GA? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Article request
Perhaps you could stub this? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk 23:26, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hrm, Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc. looks like an interesting case, but my current project is Time, Inc. v. Hill. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:37, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

inre User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines
You are cordially invited to User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines as I feel its going live is imminent and I value additional eyes and input.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the invite! A bit busy but will try to make time to read it over soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Malignant Pied Pipers of Our Time book.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Malignant Pied Pipers of Our Time book.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree with the deletion idea, no worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:35, 18 August 2011 (UTC)