User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 27

Gaming club Network
you deleted - 00:35, 31 October 2010 Dabomb87 (talk | contribs) deleted "Gaming Club Network" ‎ (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))

The GCN is a not for profit organisation in the similar to those listed here  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wargaming_associations such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Ancients, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pike_%26_Shot_Society & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Fantasy_and_Science_Fiction_Wargamers. it is established in the UK for the last 10 years and has just started an affiliated organisation in the Philipines and is working with a Dutch / Belgium and Scandivian "chapter"

Mant regard and thanks if you can correct the error in the automatic deletion of this subject -

Macvurrich (talk) 21:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC) Macvurruch
 * Hi Macvurrich. I deleted your article because it did not demonstrate why it was notable. For a topic to be considered "notable" it must have received significant coverage in (preferably multiple) reliable sources. The organisation's affiliations and longevity do not by themselves indicate notability. If you feel that you can edit the article to meet our notability guidelines and policies, I would be happy to restore the article to a user page so that you can work on it as a draft until it is ready. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 02:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Fantasia discog FLC
Could you comment on the pending matter brought up by Afro here? Candy o32  21:43, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Gaming club Network
Hi Dabomb would the fact that the GCN is used and reffrenced on Gamesworkshop website http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/articleCategory.jsp?communityArticleCatId=700001&articleCatId=700001&catId=&section=community & http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=700001&section=community&aId=4300003, White Dwarf and also that they work with Battlefront - Flames of War be acceptable or would more be needed ? Macvurrich (talk) 20:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

 * Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
 * There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
 * If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks &bull; Ling.Nut (talk) 02:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Diem
Oh well, hooray for the recent addition of unsourced articles  YellowMonkey  ( new photo poll )  01:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Fantasia Barrino discography/archive1
Here we go again. The ACCESS crew really need to start playing nicely. Modifying existing FLs like that is bad form, and we really need to consider if they should stay featured now they appear to fail MOS. I want to help these people out, but they just seem intent on rolling out proposed "style guides" which appear not to have community backing, rather than talk about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:20, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It really is quite frustrating. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style Dabomb87 (talk) 13:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think we can forget DISCOGSTYLE for the time being, it seems a fully-blown ACCESS issue, where bolding of headers (which seems to suddenly now include the left-hand column of some (but not all?) tables is allowed/mandated. Also, it appears I missed the moment that table headings were all made left-aligned.  What a mess.  The discussion continues at the aforementioned FLC, if you'd like to pop by... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I'm in the wrong mood for all this nonsense. I suggest, since we've been kept out of the loop on all this, we should start a discussion at WT:FLC, or, at least, a point to the ongoing discussions.  If you could do that so I don't explode, that'd be great.  We've got a large backlog (around 1921!) of non-MOS-compliant FLs to fix if we just roll over and take this one!  Cheers dude. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You've been doing an admirable job keeping up with all of this on top of your reviewing efforts, and I wish I could match your intensity right now. Unfortunately, I'm very busy until the end of next week, and can barely keep up with my watchlist, and whatever spare time I have I must dedicate to FLC closures. I'll do my best to pitch in to the various discussions. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If only I had the master controls for your watchlist, I'd march in there and slash it by 90% to release you for other things like The Signpost and FAC and MOS and ... oh well. Tony   (talk)  15:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and my apologies for the request really. I got so worked up so quickly I thought it best to have a level-headed "grown-up" point of view on it, and you're my first port of call.  In any case, I think we're making some progress and that despite initial antagonism in some quarters (mainly mine), we're working together with the ACCESS folks to a mutually agreeable outcome.  I've tried closing a couple of FLCs that I've not been involved in, but I'll happily do more, even if I've contributed opinion.  Take it easy if you can, and look forward to you getting some time to enjoy Wikipedia again if possible! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

RFC/U notification
Since you are mentioned: Requests for comment/Nyttend. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 14:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Yet another uncontroversial page move request
Sorry that this is like the third time I've asked you to do something like this, but could you please delete the redirects and then move this article into its place? The reason, btw, is that from 2001–02 through 2003–04, the league was known as the NBDL, and then since 2004–05 it's been known as the NBADL. I'd like this page to be named in accordance with its historical accuracy. Thanks much. Jrcla2 (talk) 04:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Move 2001–02 NBA Development League season to 2001–02 NBDL season
 * Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Closures
Hey Dabomb87, I'll get closures done, as and when, this week. If there are any I've supported then I'll wait for additional support before promoting, to prevent any issues with conflicts of interest. Hope you're good. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Gaming club Network
Hi Dabomb87 sorry to be a pain posted some details relating to 3rd party refrence to GCN, not had a reply as to if this is enough or would more information be required for the organisation to be accepted as a valid group/society Macvurrich (talk) 18:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Macvurrich. Please accept my sincere apologies for the very belated reply; I've been extremely busy lately, and have accidentally allowed some queries to be archived before addressing them. The Games Workshop site seems to be a good start, but I'm not sure if mentions solely from that site will be enough to guarantee notability. I've userfied the article for you at User:Macvurrich/Gaming Club Network so that you can continue to work on it. The editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games may be able to better determine whether the subject is notable, and if so, help you improve the article and find good sources. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:02, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

FLs "at risk"
Hey Dabomb87. In this quiet period (!) I thought I'd start a revisit of all FLs, in chronological order, and request, where needed, a review/update/delist of each one. It's going to be boring, and I'm taking it on as "my" task, rather than ours, but I hope you'd agree that we should actually, by process, just revisit lists promoted in 2005. The plan is I list the ones that are "at risk" in the closure log, and notify editors (if relevant), but after a month (or so) I'll nominate those that haven't been brought up to spec for removal from featured status. I think this is a bridge between FL and FLRC that we seem to miss, i.e. a "re-review" rather than the emotive FLRC process. Happy to discuss this more with you, it's a bit off-process, but I thought it'd be useful. Let me know. Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good plan. I'll jump in too when I get the time. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Count me in. Matthewedwards : Chat  20:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-01/Features and admins
I'd appreciate if you'd at least have the decorum to not deny me credit for restoration work that I do on images such as John Reynold's death. Thanks. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sure PLW realizes it was a simple mistake of reading the nomination too quickly. It's been fixed.  Jujutacular  talk 17:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Juju. Yep, just a simple oversight. My apologies, and thanks for your understanding. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Ma8thew

 * Are you sure about that? &bull; Ling.Nut (talk) 08:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga discography
Hi Dabomb, hope you remember me. I just wanted to ask regarding the above FL. It is littered with WP:OVERLINKs all through its references and prose. Is it fine for a FL to have such a discrepancy? Just checking, coz based on that I will remove the overlinks. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 05:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Legolas. I've been very busy, and haven't been able to keep abreast of the many changes to the MOS and other style guidelines lately, so I'm not even sure what is acceptable in discographies anymore. You may wish to see Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates and the various discussions linked from there. Of course, there is nothing wrong with being bold and editing the article as you see fit. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Help with a disruptive editor
You blocked an IP (75.151.58.242) recently. It turns out this editor actually had an account (User:Mark Osgatharp) and then used the account to circumvent the block on the IP and also make personal attacks on the relevant article talk page. The user was blocked for three days in early in 2010 for edit warring on the same article (Baptists). Here are the postings where he admits to socking and in which he made the personal attacks. Is there anything that can be done? I have placed a note updating the situation on the edit war noticeboard listing for the IP. Novaseminary (talk) 05:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * He's been blocked. Sorry for the delayed response. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:53, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Longevity COI
A discussion about longevity WP:COI has been initiated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People. As a recent contributor to this page, your comments are solicited. JJB 20:25, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Fantasia FLC
In light of the closing of the Accessibility discussion on the FLC talk page, what is to make of the current situation of the FLC of Fantasia Barrino discography. Candy o32  02:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * As of right now, I probably know much less about the recent WP:ACCESS changes and the resulting changes to articles than you do. I'm still trying to catch up on all of the discussions, and will take a look at this FLC (as well as others) when I finish. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

A. Raja
Hey User:Dabomb87, do you mind adding pending changes to this article? Biased edits are still happening post semi-protection. - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 06:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Back in the game?
Hello dude, hope all is well with you. Are you back in the game, or still on FLC rations? No stress either way, I've been holding off on going too-COI in some lists in case I need to close them, so as and when you're available for a bit of FLC, let me know. I'm pretty sure I haven't broken it....! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, I should be back to normal activity tomorrow. Thanks for shouldering the load. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Honestly, no problem at all. It was good to depart from the heady land of WP:ACCESS and get back to content.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
see barnstar page 04:21, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Simultaneous FLCs
Hey, Dabomb, long time no chat. Congrats are in (belated) order for your new admin-y bits and your promotion to FLC director, no? Anyway, I had a quick question for you. I've currently got one FLC running but I'd like to send another to FLC and I'm fairly certain my first won't close prior to that. May I? ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR talk 04:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead. You might want to ask Greaterorangepumpkin to revisit though. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:36, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. As for asking him to revisit, it appears Afro already has. ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR talk 05:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Question about Discographies and FL
Hello Dabomb87. I have a little doubt. According to WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the whole content. Is that true in case of discographies and other FL? While adding info to the lead of an artist's discography, should we not add references? No vice 7 Talk  16:13, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Buso Renkin
I know Featured list candidates/List of Buso Renkin episodes/archive1 has been open an age but I'll never be comfortable supporting a list based on WP:NONENG sources as I am unable to verify virtually everything. Don't think we've ever had clear opinion on what is allowable in this respect. Guess you might need to use some director discresion. Any idea what they require at FAC as you seem to pop over there more than I do. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  18:53, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

FLC
I've been doing just fine, and would be happy to jump back into closing FLCs etc. every once in a while. This is actually a pretty quiet period for me both on Wikipedia and in real life, so I will be able to devote some more time to FLC when necessary.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 21:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Narayan Rane
Thanks for the protection! :-) Lovy Singhal (talk) 05:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! Not sure who I pissed off in Australia.  Grsz 11 23:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Football Records in Spain
I´ve seen you have protected the article Football records in Spain. I use to update every week the statistics of games played and goals scored. I am not gonna edit none of the controversial subjects. I just wanted to ask if there is any way I can update it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipeix (talk • contribs) 02:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Featured list question
Hello. My "Wikiname" is RHM22. I've done a lot of work on an article, and I wonder if you could please tell me if it is a potential candidate for featured list status. The article is Shooting thaler. I apologize if I'm asking in the wrong place! Thanks for your time.-RHM22 (talk) 01:42, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi! You're well on your way to bringing that list to featured status. I think there are two things to focus on before FLC: expanding the lead section to summarize the entire article, and ensuring that the images meet image use policy. Also, I imagine FL reviewers would want to know what makes this site reliable. Otherwise, it's a nice list. Good luck! Dabomb87 (talk) 16:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing the list! I'll lengthen the lead. I'm not sure how to verify the websites reliability. The company that owns the website is a very large coin grading service, and they're very respected within the numismatic community. Unfortunately, I don't know if there's any way to actually prove that. I really don't know if the author of the article is reliable or not, but I guess he is since PCGS decided the article was worthwhile to put online. As for the photos, I got permission from the author and sent the OTRS e-mail to Wikipedia. The line drawings were cropped out of a book from the 1880's that I found on Google Books. Anyway, thanks again for reviewing the list!-RHM22 (talk) 18:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Balloonman
See See Requests for adminship/Balloonman (67/3/4). Jehochman Talk 01:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware that Balloonman was an admin. He has resigned his tools, though: Dabomb87 (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Opinion
Would you care to state an opinion at Talk:Evan_Turner.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)