User talk:Courcelles/Archive 25

Re: Grammy Award for Best Bluegrass Album
A reviewer opposed the list for FL status, though I am hoping for additional feedback from reviewers (or even a director) before making changes. I simply want Grammy-related FLs to be consistent for the most part. If you have any feedback or comments, feel free to add your thoughts to the nomination page. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh good lord. Is that oppose even English?  I've rarely seen an oppose I can make less sense out of than that one. Courcelles 20:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of WP:ONAU
Hello. When you recently deleted this page, you specified criterion G8. However, the page it redirected to (User:AirplanePro/Operation Nautilus) exists. I have recreated the page due to this. Note that 5 minutes after you deleted the redirect, the target was created. Just wanted to let you know, THENEW M O NO  ™ 00:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, but do note this was a perfectly valid G8 at the time, despite your edit summary to the contrary]. Courcelles 01:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Public Policy Initiative assessments
Hi Courcelles -- Amy Roth is now out on maternity leave (she had a healthy baby girl this weekend!) so I'll be filling in on research for a couple of months. (I'm LiAnna Davis, the Public Policy Initiative's communications associate.) I know you'd told Amy you were swamped now, but I'm hoping to get them all finished this week; do you have any idea when you'd be able to get to the assessments? Your page is here. Thanks again for all your help! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Bruno Clerbout page
Hi Courcelles -- I have just discovered that you have deleted the English page for Bruno Clerbout (Belgian triathlete). Can this be undone? Bruno is one of Belgium's leading triathletes who competes internationally throughout the year, finishing as the second Belgian in the 2009 Hawaii Ironman. He has an extensive international following, especially in France, which would merit a mention outside the Dutch speaking wikipedia. If it's a matter of adding outside links, that can easily be done. Tgeysels (talk) 11:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|18px]] Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. References would be a good idea- the sooner the better, however. Courcelles 19:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

About notification
Hi, Courcelles. May I ask you for a single edit? If I do it myself, a group of users 'll find it as incitation of the conflict. If you do that, it'll be considered as mediation and everyone 'll be reminded that rules are equal for everyone, including the admins. I read your advice and then I notified a group of users from "other side"  , that weren't notified, although they had to be notified, since their edits were nearly violating 3RR   or showing some other types of misbehaviour When I notified "the other side" (users that made several RR's, in fact, nearly evaded the violation of WP:3RR, user Taivo impersonated me by reposting my notification with my signature to some other users, that were "on the other side" (but AFAIK, these users were not violating 3RR rule). So, I don't want to start any fire. But, I want to play by the rules. Here  you've told me about ARBMAC: ""Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision." If someone hasn't been formally informed of the decision, they cannot receive sanctions under it.". Admin Kwamikagami needs that notification, notice of ARBMAC. He was in edit conflict with several users on articles Croatian grammar, Croatian language, Serbo-Croatian language, South Slavic languages. Just see talkpages, obviously there's no consensus. He exercised article protection on topics he was involved and he blocked one of his opponents. He must be notified. He's WP:INVOLVED. Especially since he has shown a lack of the knowledge on this matter on Commons few weeks ago. Besides Croatian authors, he was also warned by the Bosnian and the Serbian authors on his misbehaviour (he negatively tagged the dialectal map, I've explained the source of that map and what's that map talking about ). Kubura (talk) 02:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You do realise we have an entire noticeboard for these filings, right? WP:AE.  Not that it, or I have any possible ability to handle things things that are happening over Commons-side; it is just out of the purview of the ArbCom, and therefore Arbitration Enforcement.   If you think Kwamikagami has acted improperly, file an AE enforcement. Courcelles 14:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, Courcelles. Thank You for the quick reply. I'm not calling for revolution, arbitration, request for this/that.... I'm just asking for inserting a single notification . Therefore, all the parties that participate on those articles 'll be in same position. The rules are equal for everyone . Kwami has to be formally informed of the decision, so he'll also be the the ones that'll be "able" to receive sanctions, just like any other that was/is involved (and notified!). Just as another user was notified here . But Kwamikagami is involved in several articles: Croatian grammar, Croatian language, Serbo-Croatian language, South Slavic languages, and recently, Differences between standard Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian . Kwami has shown possessive behaviour (WP:OWN). E.g., here he impoverished the article about South Slavic languages in this edit . He deleted the whole referenced sections, bunch of WP:OR.... And no ARBMAC notification yet? Is so difficult to copy and to paste this message  (without last paragraph)? Bye, Kubura (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * At this point, only one of the articles that Kubura is complaining about is officially under 1RR--that is Croatian language. That is the only article where edit wars have erupted.  The other articles are rather stable, even though they contain exactly the same language as found at Croatian language.  --Taivo (talk) 22:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

List of Chicago Cubs first-round draft picks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your fine work. Feel free to post this on your user page. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Tony. Always nice when someone notices :) Courcelles 14:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/1984 Winter Olympics medal table/archive1
Hello. There were some changes in this list, regarding the medal map issue, that I would appreciate if you'd comment. Thanks. Parutakupiu (talk)
 * I'll have to seriously think about this. I really have never seen so useless a "feature" on any Wikipedia page. Courcelles 14:47, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of O'Connor Cooperative School
Dear Courcelles, I've just found our page "O'Connor Cooperative School" has been deleted due to lack of notability. Could you please send me a copy of the page prior to deletion? I will consider whether I can alter the page to improve its notability, or whether it should be placed elsewhere, but either way, a copy of the page would be very helpful.

Thank you. Ivanskyovitch (talk) 00:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've e-mailed you the wikicode for the page. Courcelles 00:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by The Bill/archive2
Thanks for letting me know about this.

Am I allowed to post my thoughts on it's nomination? It's just I think I was named as one of the nominators so wasn't sure if it would be valid --5 albert square (talk) 01:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Co-nominators support is "assumed", and as such, any comments you would make ought to be just made directly to the list. Courcelles 01:13, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks I thought that might be the case. I've added a comment that it's well referenced and there's no problems with the links that I can see. --5 albert square (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

speedy decline
I'd say it's a G6 under "pages unambiguously created in error", with the period at the end and all. But really, how about common sense? It's a worthless redirect, and gives us problems at WP:DPL due to it's seeming-but-not-really compliance with WP:INTDABLINK, so why not just delete the thing? Or leave it for another admin? Thanks, -- Ja Ga  talk 01:34, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely NONE of the pages you've tagged are valid G6's. Speedy deletion criteria are very narrow and strict.  You'll have to use RFD for these. Courcelles 01:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no way typo redirects should have to go through RfD. Why create all that extra work? -- Ja Ga  talk 01:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Why delete them at all? These should be kept, as the deletion of them broke who knows how many incoming links and old revisions from the past six years. Courcelles 01:43, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been making sure any incoming article links are redirected before listing for speedy. There's actually a very good reason for getting rid of these. (I mentioned it above.) I run Toolserver scripts to keep track of disambiguation pages with links, the focus of the WP:DPL project. Per the WP:INTDABLINK policy, a link via a redirect with (disambiguation) in its title is considered a "valid" disambiguation link, so my scripts skip over those. We had a recent problem where my scripts were failing to catch a link - it was saying a (disambiguation) redirect wasn't valid. After going through everything for a while, I realized the redirect's title was misspelled - it was (disambigaution) or something like that. The misspelled title wasted time and caused confusion in the project. So I've been finding misspelled redirect titles and getting them deleted, to avoid this confusion in the future. -- Ja Ga  talk  01:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That calls for correcting the misspelling when it is used, not breaking every old revision and external link that may be coming through that redirect. Get rid of the recent ones, fine.  Within a month or so an R3 speedy is a given.  But you tagged for G6 things that had been there for SIX YEARS.  The collateral damage of such a deletion is beyond unacceptable.  Further, G6 is for things that absolutely no-one could ever disagree with.  Since we're having this conversation, that's proof G6 was an incorrect tag. Courcelles 01:56, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say you could find someone to disagree with just about anything. The rules are there as a guide; common sense should tell you deleting a disambig redirect with a period at the end will not bring the wiki to its knees. But you've taken a position, and this is the Internet, so there will be no backing down, so I'll have to put together a mass RfD at some point. -- Ja Ga  talk 02:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

List of 1936 Winter Olympics medal winners
Hi! The 2010 Summer Youth Olympics aside, this is my first real attempt at doing one of these for the "actual" Olympics. I hope it's up to the standards you normally see for these articles/lists, and thanks for adding that extra ref for me! Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 02:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

RevDel
This and the other articles I have been asking MRG about are all from the Darius Dhlomo CCI cleanup.--*Kat* (meow?) 03:54, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * 1992 Men's Hockey Champions Trophy -- SillyFolkBoy cleaned out some (likely) copyvio but never submitted it for revdelling.
 * 1994 Men's Hockey Champions Trophy -- same as above. The prose he removed was found in the original version of the article.  I don't know if its copyvio, but if we're going to treat it as such, might as well give it the full treatment.

I wish I had the ability to RevDel things. I hate having to ask others to do this.
 * Kat, I don't think we need to RevDel away the entire history of an article over two sentences we haven't confirmed as a copyright violation. I RD1 is intended for situations that would have justified a G12 speedy, and these aren't to that level. Courcelles 04:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. That works for me. --*Kat* (meow?) 04:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As to getting the RevDel button yourself... there is such a method ;) Courcelles 04:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL can you say SNOWBALL --*Kat* (meow?) 06:19, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll just say that I was convinced I would snowball, too. I passed by some obscene number like 120/0/1. ;) I'm not saying I'm filling one out for you right this minute, but I don't think it is an idea to be laughed at, either. Courcelles 06:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * How long ago was that? I know it used to be fairly easy to your hands on a mop.  These days though, not so much.--*Kat* (meow?) 06:29, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * May of this year. Courcelles 06:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Congrats on being one of the few and proud. But I don't think I'm ready to join your ranks.  I won't say I'm not interested in becoming an admin, but I don't want to be nominated or nominate myself until I'm reasonably sure that I can pass through it successfully.--*Kat* (meow?) 06:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well, don't make that too terribly long. There's too much work to do, and not enough competent hands to do it.  (The Israeli Defence Force method of administration, perhaps?  Never have quite as many senior/flag officers as you really need?  Fine for the IDF.... not so great for Wikipedia.) Courcelles 06:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I just read your talkpage archives. Why on earth did you think you would be snowballed? You worked like a bot. Not only that, but you worked like a bot when the bots were broke!  You received three barnstars in less than a month.  And that's not even counting all the little wikithanks you got.  You know how many barnstars I've ever gotten?  One.  And that was years ago.  I turned down a second because I didn't think that I had done anything Barnstar worthy, but even that was years ago..  I've probably done things that should have earned me others, but doing is only half the battle. You have to be seen.  And I haven't been. I haven't done anything worth seeing, really.   Maybe, if I continue as I have for the past couple of months, that will change.  But right now, if go up on RfA, most people's reactions will be, who the heck is this wannabe?.--*Kat* (meow?) 07:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I also had the exceptional good fortune the couple times I really made a mess to be able to clean it up before anyone noticed ;) . I won't pretend that List of Olympic medalists in softball- my only featured work at the time- didn't help, either. However, I was also in Paris and away from the computer the eight days before I ran, do I lost any "what have you done for me lately?" votes!  (The AIV bot affair did allow me to win some points... not even worth denying that.)  Now think about something real quick.  I'm an admin, and I've noticed you enough to recognise you. And not to apply the label "wannabe" (your word, not mine) to you.  And the next person that accuses me of being highly observant will be the first! I fully believe this DD CCI will reveal some admins. (RFA after all, just hands out mops.  To pass you have to be an admin before showing up.  RFA is much more like a ratification than an election.) Courcelles 07:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)