User talk:Coredesat/Archive 7

Constantinos Makrides
Since you closed the purposed on deletion for that article as keep, I want you at least to explain me the reasons. The article was violating the WP:BIO rules. Don't you think the decision should have been taken by an administrator who was related with football? KRBN 18:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For blocking the IP vandalAlanD 22:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Bakekang
Why did u delete the article about Bakekang??? Pls. bring it back, it is one of the highest rated filipino drama nowadays. Most of the filipino dramas we're deleted by the admins, that's really unfair, while no korean dramas we're deleted so far with mostly, are lack of source...
 * Providing timestamp --Coredesat  19:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Tell you friend
Not to use personal attacks. He personally attacked me first AKA He started it. Go write some crap on his talk page. By the way, his grammar is terrible. Nothing i wrote was "incivil" as you say (is that even a word?) Tell your buddy that current events should be in the present tense and internationally relevant. A plane crash in russia that nobody died in is not current events worthy, IMHO. I do not appreicate this childish gang up on me. Please leave me the hell alone. WikiTony 03:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for the words i used on your talk page (but not what i meant) perhaps it was "incivil," as you say (still not sure if that is a word) but i hope you can see where i am coming from. I do not believe i am the only one who deserves a talking to. peace and love, WikiTony 22:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

message from RVDDP2501
Hi, I got your message and I wanted to say that the pics that were deleted were in use on the Extinctioners article but were later removed by other admins and user in an attempt to make the article smaller, so I'm just saying that they were being used in an article until they were removed, thanks for the message btw - RVDDP2501 15:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

VegaDark's Request for Adminship
 

 Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was successful at a unanimous 52/0/0. I hope I can live up to the kind words expressed of me there, and hope to now be more of an asset to the community with access to the tools. Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me in the future. Thanks again! VegaDark 07:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review
Thanks for your response. Since I doubt that if someone plays for his national team satisfies WP:BIO, what exactly can i do in WP:DRV? KRBN 00:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * When you reviewed and deleted List_of_multiplayer_features_in_Xbox_360_games did you by any chance transwiki it some where? there were about 6 gaming websites who were linking to it, and they have all lost this resource which is a shame. GarethRees 13:42, 16 February 2007 (GMT)
 * Hi Coredesat, thanks for the reply please can you add it to my talk, I will transwiki it to somethere else and notify the other sites. This is much appreciated. Thanks Gareth  GarethRees 21:30, 16 February 2007
 * Hi Coredesat thanks very much. best regards GarethRees 21:59, 16 February 2007

Deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Self-diagnosed Asperger syndrome. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Lankiveil 02:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Re-Protection
While I appreciate the gesture, I don't think it's necessary, I just reported that user after warning them multiple times about vandalizing the Led Zeppelin page, again replacing parts of the page with "You suck" it seems that's all they have to say. It's just normal retaliation. Although, if the vandal that kept putting out slanderous statements about my sexuality came back then I would ask for protection. Darth griz 98 18:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Brian Peppers
Cool, thanks. Yank sox  01:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

RE. Marilyn damage images
Your claim is incorrect because it explicity states that the report was conducted and written by the Disaster Survey Team (which is NOAA, USGS and NWS) which means all of the images and charts are made government employees (so your claim that noaa attributes photographers so its not pd is incorrect). Storm05 12:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion
I'm confused about why you went ahead and deleted the redirect at Bestiary of creatures in the Final Fantasy series after I pointed at that there were no typos in the page's name. --Dookama 12:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Please do put it back. I think it's something that the Wapanese kids would search for and they're the ones who care about Final Fantasy. --Dookama 17:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, I must've hit a nerve with Wapanese. Sorry you took offense when I just used the word because the only alternative I know (Otaku), I find more offensive. --Dookama 19:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Review requested --Dookama 19:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
I appreciate your prompt help with the Deletion Review Log. --Notmydesk 17:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review notification
A deletion review has been requested for Drawball, on which you were the AfD closer. I mistakenly was given the notice instead of you, letting you know in case you'd like to comment. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 03:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

My addition to WP:PT
Whoops, didn't see it there. Sorry about that. --Coredesat  04:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem! If something seems missing (or you're uncertain as to whether it's been protected), you can check the actual deleted page.  If cascading protection has been applied, there will be a notice of this (and a link to the page on which the protection was initiated).  —David Levy 04:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Fix Your Mistake
User:Wobble is back and goes on with unprovoked harassment. Your unfair behaviour must have encouraged him.

My edits: 

His responses:  (read edit summary). I've had enough of this. I'm not even talking about how you ignored his "moron", "scum" etc...attacks just because he was leaving. Lukas19 23:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice job:

I think the only option remaining is meditation between two of us about my opinion of your conduct and a RfC about Wobble. Lukas19 00:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode!

For the first time in well, over a month, we've put something together. We've been a little busy / the tubes of the internets crashed so apologies on the delay. We're finally back to normal, we hope....

Anyways, all is good now, here's the new episodes!


 * Episode 11 MP3

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 03:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to recieve such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Helperbot failure to remove AIV entry
FYI, I've fixed the bug that caused the HBC AIV helperbots to be unable to remove the entry you removed from WP:AIV in this diff. helperbot3 is now capable of removing that entry (or others like it), and the others will be able to get them after their next upgrade. Thanks for your work keeping Wikipedia vandalism-free! —Krellis (Talk) 01:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Request review of AfD outcome
A recent AfD which you closed, Articles for deletion/Jahbulon (3rd nomination) was heavily influenced by five socks. Whilst I'm conscious that it won't change the outcome to Delete would you take the view that the result would now be a No Consensus?

Thanks.

ALR 10:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hanuman Das, Ekajati, Rosencomet and Frater Xyyzz have all now been blocked for sock-puppetry and Jefferson Anderson had previously been blocked as a sock of Frater Xyyzz. A further SSP case is ongoing to ratify that at present.
 * I'm happy that any review won't lead to a delete, I'm conscious that the level of debate with the above individual roobably didn't help the case of those of us who understand the subject and would like to see a specious article deleted, but I would prefer the conclusion to reflect an inability to reach consensus, particularly given the level of sock-puppetry whicch led to the heated debate.
 * ALR 15:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikihalo
The Wikihalo itself is not up for deletion, just the pages that weren't being used. This had been discussed before, and then it just didn't get done. The page is going to remain there, but the way it is given out is being changed at Barnstar and award proposals/Proposed Changes. I'm going to redirect the pages until we finish the redesign. --evrik (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Logo deletion
Hello, the logo I uploaded was deleted ( BIAS info box section - and I did receive warning this would happen. I think I must have chosen the wrong copyright/licensing option, but then though I'd fixed it.  I assure you, I have permission to use!  I've replaced the logo, hopefully with correct permissions this time.  If not, please advise what permissions are suitable for this usage.  I've used other company info boxes in the same industry as models.  Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacw123 (talk • contribs)
 * Timestamping for archive --Coredesat  23:23, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Daryl Swart
I just wanted to let you know that if you are scrolling through your deletion logs, you will see a bluelink for Daryl Swart. I didn't undelete the article, but I did make Daryl Swart into a redirect to Tree63, as it was before it was moved to Fool that ruined America. A ecis Brievenbus 23:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The Ultimate, Ultimate Challenge
I see that you deleted The Ultimate, Ultimate Challenge after a long AFD. You should also delete The ultimate, ultimate challenge, which redirected to the deleted article. &#9679;DanMS • Talk 05:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. A pox on Wikipedia for having case-sensitive article titles! &#9679;DanMS • Talk 05:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Gordon
Wow, you are the second person to do that (after me). Gordon was appealing a community restriction on editing not a ban. JoshuaZ 05:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh never mind, didn't realize what your block was for. JoshuaZ 05:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I am slightly confused (doesn't take much)...why the outright ban? I thought it was just a ban Schiavo-related pages/talk pages.  I think I missed something. - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 10:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * SVRTVDude, see WP:ANI. – Chacor 11:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, that makes perfect sense now. Wow!  I wish he would have just excepted the WP:CN consensus and moved on.  Oh well, ya can't help 'em all. - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 12:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Buffyverse chronology
Hiya, I noticed you nominated some articles "Buffyverse chronology" and "Buffyverse chronology (canon)" for deletion. Shouldn't these two nominations be combined? I would massively appreciate if you kept an open mind about these articles since they were masses of work to put together and were based on many secondary sources, most of which could be sourced given time. Thanks -- Paxomen 17:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've withdrawn the Delete vote per request. 23skidoo 00:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Recurrent Spammer
Hello, user Dmc129 has been repeatedly and blatantly spamming the 'Track day' article with a company link (he's done it about six times now). I've removed it on each occasion, and warned him several times, but he continues to do it. I'm not too sure what to do about it now, so thought I'd bring it to the attention of an administrator such as yourself. I'll continue to monitor and remove his spam, but would appreciate it if you could deal with it more effectively and hopefully permanently. Regards - playbike 17:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Lakelands Park Middle School
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lakelands Park Middle School. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TerriersFan 17:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I reverted an out of process closure
And I was supported in my actions by admins. You might say I was being bold or utilising WP:IAR ... but oh wait ... I forgot .... I am not an admin!

If I (and Slimvirgin) hadn't done that where would we be?

In another bloody mess of an DRV or some similar nonsense. But feel free to patronise me on my talk page again ant time.

David Spart 04:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Not going to warn me again? I assume that is a joking reference to my sarcastic request above. As you are well aware the closer of the DRV had prejudiced the process by declaring his plans on wikipediareview.  This is the same admin who then tried to cancel the AfD early.  His word is not holy writ and no consensus is needed before starting an AfD - that is what AfD's are for.  I gently recommend that you review you familiarity with the processes of wikipedia.  David Spart 04:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode!

This is a special episode we recored specifically dealing w/ the whole Essjay/Ryan Jordan situation. We recorded this before Jimbo's second comment, so it might be a little dated but still a good listen.


 * Episode 12 MP3

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 08:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to recieve such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Can you help?
Hi, I created an article Infobox multi locus allele clusters, which should have been a template, I've now created the correct template (I wasn't sure of the difference, well I'm still not to be honest). Anyway I thought, as an admin you could possibly do me a big favour and delete the rogue article I created. Sorry for the bother. I'm trying very hard at the moment to be civil to everybody, and not to get angry. Sorry if I have caused you any problems previously. Hope you can help, and thanks. All the best. Alun 18:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #10
The March issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Page Blanking
Sorry about that, I tend to get a bit overzealous at times >.> Ciao. --Sylent 14:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 13!

We've decided to avoid the direct link to the audio file in an attempt to prevent any sort of audio format war. You can download whichever version you want (we have OGG, MP3 and AAC on the site.

The direct download to Episode 13 is http://wikipediaweekly.com/2007/03/06/wikipedia-weekly-13/

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 07:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to recieve such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Lackadaisy Deletion Review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lackadaisy. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SanfordAbernethy 09:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:ASR
This policy is a style policy, it says nothing about having articles that are well sourced with reliable sources. That's why we can have Wikipedia and Jimbo Wales. JoshuaZ 04:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

North America (Americas)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of North America (Americas). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AlexCovarrubias ( Let's talk! ) 17:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Rites of Ash
You can see our credit for the music video here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_I-Dee

As for song credits, most of the MTV online archive for our credits have since been taken down. I could only find this site with credit of our work: http://www.mtv.com/#/ontv/dyn/realworld-season17/episode/featured_music.jhtml?episodeId=96397

I have the signed MTV contracts right here. We have numerous press releases and related materials on our websites: www.ritesofash.com -and-  www.myspace.com/ritesofash

WP:POINT
The nomination was NOT in bad faith or disruptive; it's worth noting I've not recently been anything other than a witness to any disputes in which WP:POINT was used, inappropriately or otherwise. --Random832 22:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC) A page may be speedily kept only if one or more of the following holds: None of the above apply. --Random832 22:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:CSK
 * No-one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted, and the nominator either withdraws the nomination, or wishes the page to be moved, merged, or have something else done to it other than deletion. Also, there are some cases where the nominator specifies they are nominating for the sake of process, for someone else, or some other reason but are not stating an opinion themselves.  I did not withdraw the nomination
 * The nomination was unquestionably vandalism or disruption and nobody else recommends deleting it (since calling a nomination vandalistic does not make it so, and vandals can be correct). Examples of this include obviously frivolous nominations (Such as featured articles), nominations which are made solely to provide a forum for disruption (e.g., a userpage of a contestant in a heated edit war by their opponent(s) solely for harassment) and making nominations of the same article with the same arguments after they were strongly rejected. This does not apply, nomination was in good faith. I provided ample evidence that my view on the misuse of this link was shared by others
 * The nominator is banned, so they are not supposed to edit. In that case, the nominated page is speedily kept while the nomination can be tagged with db-ban and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. Obviously inapplicable
 * The page is a policy or guideline. The deletion processes are not a forum for revoking policy. The page is a shortcut. It is not itself a policy or guideline

I have posted a thread about this on ANI, specifically concerning your unjustified accusation against me, and not on the merits of the closure, which I am confident will be adequately discussed on the DRV. I'd also post to let you know about the DRV, but since you've already posted in it there's not much need. --Random832 23:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User Lukas in the white people article
See his conduct please in the white people article. Arguing with everyone else, not with me now. The only way not to engage in an edit war with him is to give in to his POV. Veritas et Severitas 19:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Everyone else might be LSLM: IP, User:65.3.245.190 looks similar to his other sockpuppets, , especially given the similarity of their post history and posting times. Lukas19 19:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

See The Article?
Eventhough Scoopydoo 3 was deleted since you are an administartor can I see the article?Pendo 4 23:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Turko-Persian Tradition
With your help, Turko-Persian Tradition was a speedy keep due to bad-faith nomination. After that, there was an attempt to wipe it out by merging with Persianate and Persianate society, and the latest contention is "copyvio, merge" to achieve the same ends. The underlying accusation is that the source has not been credited, which is plainly false because the original, not despoiled draft had all the references, and they were intentionally removed in preparation to the [copyvio] tag. Would you please re-examine the fight around this article again, and remove the [copyvio] tag, which is used as a tool to achieve the same ends by different means. Barefact 09:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 14!

The link to all versions of Wikipedia Weekly 14 is at http://wikipediaweekly.com/2007/03/11/wikipedia-weekly-14/

The OGG version is here The MP3 version (non free file format but it works on an iPod) is here

In this edition

* We wrap up the Essjay affair, as the famous Wikipedian cuts ties to the online encyclopedia. * A look at the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year Competition, which finished earlier this week. In addition, all the Featured Pictures of 2006 are available as a bittorrent download. * The new “Username Usurpation” feature at the English Wikipedia. * Jimmy Wales travels to India for the recent Indian WikiCamp, and narrowly survives an attack of ninja monkeys. * One thousand Featured Articles at the German Wikipedia. * 300 Spartans.

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 19:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to recieve such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Creative commons
Can I use creative commons images on my user page? Please say yes. -- § Hurricane E  RIC § archive 15:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Why I used popups
I see your point, but this users edits seem hostile to me. I don't understand why they want to hide this data. It's really bizarre. I won't use pop-ups in the future like that, OK? futurebird 05:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Chacor RfA Talk Page
Please review the history at that page. There are three editors tag-teaming me to avoid the same rule. Please warn them about blanking my thread for no reason. I am fully aware of the 3RR rule, as my last edit summary made clear. As you've warned me so quickly after my restoration of an improperly deleted thread, can I assume you're friends with one or more of them? I hope that's not the case, but if it is, that's too bad. Also, please remove the "warning" from my page, as I've violated no rules, and do not plan to do so.K. Scott Bailey 06:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is a quote of the entire section you linked to when accusing me of soapboxing, incivility, and other sundry (and imaginary) violations. This was linked to specifically with regards to "soapboxing."  It clearly demonstrates that I was not even coming CLOSE to doing what you accused me of.  If you still feel I was "soapboxing", please point specifically to where in the posts I made to the RfA Talk Page I was violating the WP guidelines referenced here.

Wikipedia is not a soapbox Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Wikipedia articles are not:

Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views. Self-promotion. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects you have a strong personal involvement in. However, do remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other, including the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which is difficult when writing about yourself. Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles is unacceptable. See Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Advertising. Articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Wikipedia does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations) for guidelines on corporate notability. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kscottbailey (talk • contribs) 06:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

Articles for deletion/You
Just a request to add a rationale to your close. Thanks, Pan Dan 17:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not sure there's any need for a rationale. Closing it as delete or no consensus would have led to protests given the overwhelming number of keep arguments there (despite the fact that most of them are arguments listed in WP:ATA). --Coredesat  19:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (--copied from my talk page)
 * So the rationale for your close was that you didn't want there to be "protests"? If that's true, would you mind reverting yourself and letting another admin close it?  Pan Dan 19:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's an obvious keep. It simply can't be closed any other way, and most other admins would also have closed it as a keep. If you want to move it to Wiktionary or merge it somewhere, that's an editorial decision that can be made outside an AFD since deletion isn't involved. --Coredesat  19:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (--copied from my talk page)
 * "it's an obvious keep" -- clearly you thought the result was "keep," I can see that. However it was not clear to me why.  That's why I asked you for a rationale.  Even though it's obvious to you, would you mind providing one?  (BTW, a result of "transwiki and delete" would require admin action.)  Pan Dan 19:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for interrupting but it was a clear consensus to keep. That's how it works.  The Rambling Man 19:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me explain why I asked Coredesat for his explanation. What I see when I read the AfD is an argument to delete rooted in policy, and a voteflood of keeps.  I'm not asking for a reversal of the close, I'm just asking for an explanation of how the closer arrived at his conclusion.  Some of the participants made thoughtful arguments, and a no-explanation close seems inappropriate.  Why is my request for an explanation unreasonable?  BTW, Rambling Man, feel free to provide a reason why you think the result of the AfD was a "clear" keep.  Pan Dan 21:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me, I hate jumping in on other folk's discussions, but in this case there were 27+ supports for keeping while 6 editors opted for delete and a few sat in the mid-ground. To be honest, while Coredesat isn't providing an explanation for the keep, it's pretty clear that the WP consensus was to keep the article. At best you could optimistically have hoped for a no consensus but I think 27/6/5 typically results in a support, and why should an admin go against a clear and well-formed consensus? The Rambling Man 21:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Consensus is not determined by a votecount. If it were, I would have "voted" myself.  I didn't "vote," because the argument to delete had already been made: Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  Not only was the argument made, but every argument to keep because this wasn't "really" a dictionary article was refuted.  Of course, that's just my view of it.  The point I'm trying to make here is that whatever your view, this was a complicated AfD with thoughtful arguments, and the closer owes a minimal explanation to the participants.  Pan Dan 22:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In part, I agree, this is not a vote &tc. However, with only six opposes, including:
 * this article is already covered at Wiktionary
 *  - Per Nomination
 * It is written like a dictionary article.
 * This is an interesting and encyclopedically-written article
 * none of which really provide more than a 'per nom'. Where was the oppositional thought?  What more needs to be said? The Rambling Man 22:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * C'mon, the AfD went into a lot more than that. Read it again.  Don't just look at the comments that come after the bolded votes.  See the comments of, for example, Uncle G, Tikiwont, Emeraude, Sjakkalele (who recommended keep, by the way), and Sarcasticidealist, and the back-and-forth.  Pan Dan 22:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand, but ultimately it's subjective and if the arguments of the six deleteists didn't outweigh the 26 keepists then it won't be deleted. Seriously, as I've said on your talk page (apologies once again to Coredesat for squatting on his talk page for this) if you have a major problem with this, take it to deletion review.  The Rambling Man 22:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

All right, that's enough - Pan Dan, if you have a problem with the close, go to DRV. I'm not adding a rationale, and it's an obvious keep. AFD is not a cleanup tag. --Coredesat  22:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies
..for butting in. Hope your talk page hasn't been unduly overwhelmed! All the best The Rambling Man 22:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holiday Coredesat!
Trampton 23:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 15!

The link to all versions of Wikipedia Weekly 14 is at

The OGG version is here The MP3 version (non free file format but it works on an iPod) is here

In this edition

This episode sees Liam, more commonly known as Witty Lama, catching up with Rama’s Arrow and Ragib to talk about contributing to Wikipedia from and Indian and Bangladeshi perspective. Topics include their growing collection of Featured Articles, the success of the Indian WikiProject, and the problem of Internet access on the Subcontinent.

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 23:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Rickey Smith
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Rickey Smith. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. BlueLotas 04:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Retarded Animal Babies
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Retarded Animal Babies. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Edokter (Talk) 18:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Perhaps you could advise me how you would have handled the matter differently. I am not sure how I would have handled the matter differently, as I was preserving the article from POV edits.Arcayne 00:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC) Actually, maybe you could take a look at the Talk page, and weigh in your opinion. We could always use an admin's pov (the good kind, lol). As I see it, there are two or three groups: Your thoughts?Arcayne 00:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * the group angered by the film, and want to lessen the impact of the article;
 * the group trying to get the article to FA status;
 * the occasional editors who make a change here and there.

Question about denying the speedy on Kriya Yoga (disambiguation)
Hello, may I please ask the reason why you denied the request for speedy deletion of Kriya Yoga (disambiguation)? That disambiguation is unecessary because a disambiguation for Kriya Yoga already exists as Kriya. If you compare the already extant disambiguation Kriya and the recently created Kriya Yoga (disambiguation) you will see that the latter only links to one unique article Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath. The other article it links to is already provided in the original Kriya disambiguation page. Thanks so much. - Watchtower Sentinel 08:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making it a redirect other than an unecessary double. When I tagged it I had it in mind that Admins will automatically check Kriya Yoga and see the already existing Kriya disambiguation. You are a very responsible Admin, so fast to act and deserves more awards. - Watchtower Sentinel 08:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * This editor has a personal vendetta against me and has been repeatedly indefinitely blocked for disruptive behavior, yet continues to evade the blocks with sockpuppets. Please see Requests for checkuser/Case/Watchtower Sentinel, Requests for checkuser/Case/Terminator III, Requests for checkuser/Case/Akal Purakh --Hamsacharya dan 06:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: bad licence
The guy who took that picture, told me I could use it! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajuk (talk • contribs) 19:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

SURE
I am sure this user is cool but why is your user name apart of my talk under nonsense. Could you explain THAT!! If you can then it'd be great you start talking to ME ABOUT that .Thankz (^_^) P.S. I am a amine fan too of Inuyasha. make sure you know that. You're not,so HA!!!!!! Kataraisdabest 13:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)kataraisdabest MARCH 19,2007

don't know what you are talking about             ( % : 0)
OK MR.COREDESAT I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. FIRST OF ALL I DON'T BELIEVE IN A MYSPACE. I WATCH DATELINE:TO CATCH A PREDATOR, SO MYSPACE IS OUT OF THE QUESTION. SECOND I DON'T CARE WHO YOU ARE. A COLLEGE STUDENT OR A SENIOR. WELL GUESS WHAT. I MAY NOT BE A SENIOR IN COLLEGE BUT I AM A SENIOR. AND GET THIS I DON'T LIKE PEOPLE DISING ME, OK. IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF. THIRDLY I SAW YOUR PAGE. IT LOOKED NICE SO INSTEAD SENDING A MEAN MESSAGE I THOUGHT I COULD SEND A MESSAGE NOT SO MEAN. I TOOK UP YOUR INTREST IN AMINE. I'VE BEEN A FAN SINCE 8 SO YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY THAT THIS IS MY FINAL CHANCE. INSTEAD OF JUGDING A BOOK BY IT'S COVER, YOU COULD HAVE READ MY TALK PAGE. IT CLEARLY SAY THAT I HAVE VANDLICED AN ADULT SWIM ARTICLE. AT THE TIME, I HAD NO IDEA WHO TO MAKE AN ARTICLE. I EVEN SENT A SORRY NOTE SAYING THAT I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS DOING. SO NEXT TIME READ THE PAGE BEFORE YOU SEND "FINAL WARNINGS" TO IT. IT WASN'T A PLEASURE TALKING TO YOU SO NO "THANK YOU'S" ARE NESSARY. GOOD BYE FROM Kataraisdabest 13:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)KATARAISDABEST 3/20/07

Kriya Yoga
Hi,

If you have no objections, I'm going to restore the previous structure to the kriya yoga disambiguation page. There needs to be clear distinction between "kriya" and "kriya yoga".

Kriya yoga can be subdivided into 2 fundamental groups:
 * 1. Kriya yoga of Babaji *common usage*
 * 2. Other Kriya yogas (kriya is just a word meaning "action")

The first one (common usage) can be further subdivided into two groups, which are lineage based (see parampara for understanding).
 * A. Kriya yoga given by Babaji to Lahiri Mahasaya
 * B. Kriya yoga given by Babaji to others

Currently the main Kriya yoga page refers specifically to 1A, while the kriya disambiguation refers specifically to 2. Therefore 1B has been elided. This is the reason for the need for a secondary disambiguation.

Thanks. --Hamsacharya dan 18:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, B does not exist. The disambiguation was redundant to Kriya before the redirect. The redirect is absolutely perfect. Because of it those who will search for Kriya will find its meaning in the disambiguation and those who will search for Kriya Yoga will also find it there. Hamsacharya dan's only problem is he won't be able to insert the name of his "guru" Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath in this new merged disambiguation without implying that his "Kriya Yoga" is different from Mahavatar Babaji's Kriya Yoga given to Lahiri Mahasaya. Please refer to my talk page and to Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Yogiraj_Gurunath_Siddhanath to see the bigger picture. Thank you. - Watchtower Sentinel 01:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Esteban Peñate
Hmmm... you could have warned me before you did that (:O( can you please reinstate it so we can work on the article, I didnt even know that this article had the issue you stated but I would love to work on it and improve it to meet the requirements, by the way you should also let User:Victao lopes know why you deleted it b/c this user doesnt understand why you did that, by the way are you allowed to commit to speedy deletes like that before informing me (even after i posted that in the discussion board) and suggesting what I should do to help make sure this article is acceptable? (:O) -Nima Baghaei (talk) 02:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * oh wait you did tell him, thanks b/c i didnt know why it was deleted in the past (:O) helps clear the problem up, but do you think you could revert the deletion so I could help him improve the article and bring it up to standards? (:O) -Nima Baghaei (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ok i updated it, i think its ready to be published, whats your view? (:O) -Nima Baghaei (talk) 05:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

HELLO REMEMBER ME
'''HELLO USER: COREDESAT DO YOU REMEMEBER ME? IT'S ME KATARAISDABEST ON USER STARFIRE&ROBIN       SHE'S A FRIEND OF MINE AND I HAVE ACCESS TO HERS JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY YOU CAN'T BLOCK ME AND DON'T EVER SAY THIS IS MY "FINAL WARNING" WHEN I NEVER GOT A FIRST WARNING SO SEE YA BABE PRETTY PRETTY SOON anisha 23:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)STARFIRE&ROBIN AKA KATARAISDABEST MARCH 21,2007'''

THIS IS FROM MY SISTER: SO LISTEN
'I AM THE SISTER OF KATARAISDABEST'' AND IM GOING TO TELL U SOMETHING. IF U TRY AND BLOCK MY SISTER I'LL BLOCK U BECAUSE WHAT U WROTE WAS NOT NICE.SHE AND I DO NOT LIKE WHAT U WROTE. I'M A COMPUTER GENIUS. AND I HAVE MY WAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SIGNED BYanisha 23:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC) SISTER OF KATARAISDABEST ON USER: STARFIRE&ROBIN 3-21-07 SEE YA AND HOPE TO WRITE SOON'''

RFC discussion of User:CineWorld
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Requests for comment/CineWorld 1. -- Real96 07:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Southern mafia
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Southern mafia. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MBHiii 14:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Esteban Peñate
The only source I've found was the one I listed. If another one is really needed, I'm gonna try to find one, but I don't think I'll make it. No problem if you feel the article deserves being deleted, but next time warn me before, so I can have the chance of improving it. Victao lopes 00:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Coredesat
I like to sincerely apologise if I offended with my "forceful" expression in our exchanges earlier on. I am still relatively new to WP am still trying to find the ropes around here. I ask for your indulgence and promise to try to do better in the future.Ivygohnair 08:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Contest judge
Hello! You've been listed as a judge in Messedrocker's Contest. If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. &mdash;Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 20:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Change in Template:DRV top
Just a heads-up that I made a small change in the DRV top (or drt) template: the level 4 header, with a (closed) marker, is now part of the template. So any discussion can now be closed by simply replacing the four equal signs on each side of the title into the the template text:  ==== [[Title]] ====  is changed to  Title  which turns into

Title (closed)
Hope that makes closures a bit easier. Comments and questions please here. Take care, trialsanderrors 08:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Belated thanks
Just noticed that you fixed a bit of vandalism on my user page a number of days ago. Much appreciated. -- LeflymanTalk 18:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Your block of user:Vengeancetaker
His contribution list seems to imply that he was reverting vandalism, not causing? -- Avi 05:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! As I told Chacor, he has an unblock tag up, but I didn't want to unblock without checking with you (the blocking admin) even though it did look funny. Thanks again. -- Avi 13:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

IMA
What's wrong with you? User:The Kinslayer's marking Institute for Mathematics and its Applications for speedy deletion was nothing but malicious vandalism or the act of a complete idiot. You should have removed that tag instead of deleting the article. Michael Hardy 02:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Could you explain, since it escapes me, just what it is in the present version of the article that asserts notability that was not in the version that "The Kinslayer" marked for deletion? The article was stubby, but it was not "so poorly done" ("The Kinslayer's" words) that it would be reasonable to tag it for deletion along with "garbage" ("The Kinslayer's" term).  And so tagging it was patently unreasonable; under the circumstances it was what I would expect only of someone who picks articles more-or-less at random at nominates them for deletion without reading them.
 * It continues to appear to me that both The Kinslayer and you were not acting in good faith. You are not a person who should be telling me to be uncivil; you were uncivil to me before you heard of me. Michael Hardy 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It continues to appear to me that both The Kinslayer and you were not acting in good faith. You are not a person who should be telling me to be uncivil; you were uncivil to me before you heard of me. Michael Hardy 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Coredesat, if you will take a moment to visit the talk page of the Wikipedia mathematics community, you will find that this tagging and precipitous deletion is being widely condemned. Michael Hardy is irate, and says so bluntly. He is a senior mathematics editor with solid support from the community, who constantly makes good contributions and has a long history of doing so. When he criticizes this deletion, I suggest you look past the words that offend you to see the action that offended him. The article should not have been tagged; that was irresponsible but not your doing. But the article also should not have been deleted — certainly not so quickly, not without investigation, and not without notification; that was your doing.
 * Admins are granted extra tools on the condition that they use them wisely and responsibly. We have enough mathematically trained admins to handle deletions of mathematics articles. Consider letting them do so.
 * With responsibility comes accountability. You made a mistake. It happens. It is appropriate for Michael Hardy to say so. It is not appropriate for you to threaten a block. Especially given the provocation; for, in reading his exchange with The Kinslayer, who tagged the article, we find that Michael Hardy is rebuffed with insolence and sarcasm and stubbornness — despite several editors joining in to explain why this kind of tagging should not be done.
 * Can we set the heat aside to find some light? Please take more care with articles outside your expertise; either take a moment to investigate, or ask someone else to do so. If you can rise to it, please apologize to Michael Hardy for the aggravation and inconvenience your mistake caused. And please have a word with The Kinslayer and help see that the inappropriate tagging and hostile brush-offs do not continue. These three acts, and especially the apology — which is civility in its most profound sense, would be truly worthy of an admin. Any one of the three would be a welcome step forward. --KSmrqT 04:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I just want to point out, that while The Kinslayer's behavior is in no way acceptable, Michael Hardy called him an idiot on the article's talk page before leaving that first message on The Kinslayer's page. Leebo T / C  10:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Coredesat, we all make mistakes, I'm sure I've speedy deleted articles which shouldn't have been. The important thing is to try to learn from our mistakes. The bottom line here is that the IMA is certainly notable, and it shouldn't have been deleted. That that wasn't readily apparent to you was unfortunate, and not your fault. However as KSmrq suggests above it would have been a simple matter to check. Regards. Paul August &#9742; 05:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Kristine Sa AfD Discussion
Hello! Thank you for engaging me in the discussion over the Kristine Sa article. The poor thing (the article) is in terrible shape and I think the AfD discussion was/is totally in order, although we do find ourselves on separate sides of a decision. I've responded to your remarks and would greatly appreciate further comments. Thanks very much, Scienter 12:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)
Hi, seeing you have been involved in previous Afd debates I invite you to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 17:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

About that AFD.
Aww, you have to spoil the joke... George Leung 01:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but not everyone knows who he is, and they might not see your links. --Core<font color="#006449">desat  01:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Lee Wykes
When you closed this, it looks like you missed deleting the other article in the AFD, My Life in the D (book). Brianyoumans 03:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * And my thanks to you for all your hard work as an admin! Without good admins, this whole crazy enterprise wouldn't work. Brianyoumans 06:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 16!

The link to all versions of Wikipedia Weekly 16 is at

The OGG version is here The MP3 version (non free file format but it works on an iPod) is here

In this edition

Lots of stuff, too much to list here.

As always you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/!

Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in! ''Feel free to post to the mailing lists too.... apparently not many people know about us.... yet''

For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 06:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #11
The April issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion of A Bathing Ape
I've undeleted this article that you wrongly speedied yesterday. It has a two year history and other articles linked to it. Yes it read like an advert and had the suitable cleanup tags in place. Speedy deletion is not suitable for an article with 800 edits over a two year period. Such an article should go through afd. Secretlondon 17:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

List of non-existent California hurricanes
What gives with this post on my user page: "This is the only warning you will receive. The next time you make unilateral page moves against consensus, you will be blocked. There is and has been consensus to leave the titles as they are. --Coredesat 04:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)" You have not participated in the discussion about the factually false title of the article ("List of California hurricanes"), and what discussion there was (very little in fact) did not result in a consensus. However, this raises an interesting question: does consensus overrule facts on Wikipedia? In this instance, there are hurricanes in California because a "consensus" says there are? This is the sort of thing which brings discredit to Wikipedia.Tmangray 04:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Akisha Samia
Just wanted to let you know that I removed the PROD for a third time, one and two. I assume you just missed the fact that it had already been removed. The IP that added the last time was trying to create an AfD but of course could not create the necessary page. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep. I think it was for being a hoax. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: BookShorts
Sorry, I'm kind of new here. Just to check, what would you have done? Used a bit too much like spam tag? I notice that in the deletion log, it got deleted for ''A7:Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. An article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject.'' - Should I have used a ?? As I say, I'm new and the finer points of some of the policies are still a tad confusing. Thanks, ...adam...  ( talk &bull;  contributions ) 14:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Automated Peer-Review
May I ask what the deal is with the Automated Peer-Review javascript program being run by User:Kmarinas86? I saw that you'd dealt with him last night and temporarily blocked him. I've raised concerns about this edit program on this talk page at User_talk:Kmarinas86, but before I take this any further I wanted to see if others thought it was a big deal or if you'd already dealt with the issue. Again, I hope I wasn't too irritating with my concerns about WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Merging. As I said, your team is doing good work on this subject. Best, --Alabamaboy 15:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Just saw your comments about all this on the Administrators's Noticeboard/Incidents, so I think I've got enough background on all this. Best,--Alabamaboy 15:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Things in my sandbox
I have taken steps to prevent them from being searchable and indexed by Google. And, most important, they are not meant to be forks. Would it be possible to have them undeleted, or at least, undeleted for my personal use? &mdash; Instantnood 18:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)