User talk:Delldot/Archive 23

A "deleted scene" from the Soviet-Albanian split article
Obviously I could have the article be far larger than it is now, but that would be a bad thing, so some things are naturally enough omitted. Here's one of them I didn't include: "Khrushchev remarked [at the International Meeting of Communist Parties in Moscow, 1960] that he 'could reach a better understanding with Harold Macmillan than with the Albanians.' To which Hoxha retorted: 'That you can come to terms with Macmillan, Eisenhower, Kennedy and their stooge, Tito, is a personal talent of yours which no one envies.' ... And Mehmet Shehu [who went along with the Albanian delegation] to Khrushchev's question as to whether they had any criticisms at all to make of Stalin announced: 'Yes, not getting rid of you!'" (quoted in Ash, p. 201.) --Ismail (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha! I think that's charming!  I would lean towards including it just because it's interesting and funny, but at the same time there's only so many ways Hoxha can say "you're abandoning Marxism-Leninism and being the lapdog of the West!" and we've already got a bunch of them in the article!  Maybe it could replace another quote of the same type? I think it should come down to whether you think there's a convenient place for it in the article and that it's not being too repetitive to add more of this back-and-forth.  Maybe stick the quote on the talk page so you can go get it if you need it some time you can get it and put it in. Great work in general Ismail!   delldot   &nabla;.  15:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Junior Schools' Debating
Hi Delldot,

Thanks for the advice. I found one independent source (newspaper) and I'll get searching for some more. I do understand the need to validate the article from outside, it's just that most of the national media stuff were vids/news pieces and the links are dead so I didn't want to include them.

Thanks for your advice anyway!

pirates — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melikepirates (talk • contribs) 00:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, ok, great work! I couldn't find anything when I googled it but maybe your skills are sharper than mine.  Good call not including the dead links.  Were you able to find more than one source?  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  00:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I found a host of school webpages that link to it but I understand that they make the whole thing a bit cyclical. I'm about to edit in one more newspaper source that references the winner of the competition in 2012 and names the competition so hopefully that will do for now! edit: I found one national newspaper that references former winners and that is now included. Now to figure out how to sign my posts...

Again thanks for your help.

Melikepirates (talk) 01:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Melikepirates (talk • contribs) 01:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree the school websites are not that awesome. Hopefully you can find more news references, sorry I missed that one!  The more you add the better off the article is.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  01:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter
Delivered 01:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC) by EdwardsBot. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the spamlist.

thanks
Hi Delldot, thanks for helping with the moves of Makena and Paraense. Azylber (talk) 05:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for the nice note! (Whenever I'm doing CSD stuff I dread getting new messages!) delldot   &nabla;.  05:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can imagine. And people who are complaining make a lot more noise than people who are happy. Anyway, keep up the good work!! Azylber (talk) 07:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You got that right. Nice meeting you.  delldot   &nabla;.  04:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

childofmidnight user pages
A very reasonable question. I agree that content may stay in userspace almost indefinitely. all of these (including some CSD's which wont show up at the MFD page) seem to be already deleted articles from 2009 or 2010, userfied, with absolutely no edits by COM since then. COM was banned for a year, but that year ban didnt go into effect until august 2010, sometimes a year after he requested userfication. the ban has been presumably lifted since august 2011, but no edits by them since. since these could be searched for in a search engine, and could be confused for actual articles, i have asked for them to be considered for deletion. If anyone wants to try to rescue them, im cool with that. i tried myself, with an apple article he asked to try to rescue. I will probably try to buy those apples myself, but 6 acres does not an article make. The CSD's were articles COM copypasted into his userspace just prior to a deletion, thus keeping them in userspace in BAD FAITH (ive done it myself, but only for a few days in case there was some smidgen of sourceable info i wanted to save somewhere else-and i dont create a page with its name, but add it to my ridiculously cluttered sandbox, which has a huge banner warning casual readers to beware). we dont get to keep deleted article content in our spaces forever just because we like it. however, if anything i did here smacks of "this is my site, my rules" call me on it. im not bad, really.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, I don't think you're bad at all. Thanks for the history, that's really interesting.  I'm not totally sure what to do about it knowing that.  I agree they probably shouldn't sit there indefinitely as an end run around AFD.  Maybe I'll delete them and leave a note on their talk page saying if they ever want to start working on them again I can undelete them.  Since they haven't edited in so long it's probably moot anyway.  What do you think?   delldot   &nabla;.  05:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * editor was very competent at asking for undeletions of content. that would probably be fine. as long as we are welcoming if they return, not hostile or showing any personal grudge. they understand how we work, they shouldnt be offended by my actions. lets see how the MFD's turn out. for the CSDs your idea definitely will work, very considerate. You might ask around at one of the MFD's for suggestions on how to proceed, esp. for any that are discussed more, like the curious Mermaid problemMercurywoodrose (talk) 05:33, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, sounds reasonable, I'll go ahead and speedy the ones you tagged (unless someone else already has). Did you MFD other pages in the same userspace?  Or did you de-tag some and list them at MFD instead?  Thanks for explaining everything to me.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  05:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Marja (disambiguation)
Thanks for moving! Azylber (talk) 07:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem :) delldot   &nabla;.  00:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Awesome
Why become an admin when you're around mopping up A7's like nobody else's business. Mkdw talk 04:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Aw, thank you for noticing! I appreciate that, when I saw the new message box I was afraid this was going to be someone annoyed at me for deleting their thing.  :D  delldot   &nabla;.  04:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for fixing up Seder so quickly! --  YPN YPN   ✡  04:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thank you for the nice note! :D  delldot   &nabla;.  04:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Please Restore ASCII Group
Hello,

Can you please restore ASCII Group wikipedia page for us? There was a mistype and miscommunication. We uploaded a picture, and also typed in some extra information about the company. Please let us know if there is anything you can do to restore our page!

I am responding to the following: (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. cv of http://www.ascii.com/ASCII/Ab... Let us know why you deleted it, and how you can restore it?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CW221 (talk • contribs)
 * Hi CW221, I actually deleted that page because it contained material from another website--we can't have anything copied from other sites here for legal reasons. What you could do is work on the page in your userspace (that is, any page beginning with User:CW221/... such as User:CW221/Sandbox) and let you rewrite it from scratch.  Unfortunately it's not enough to just reword material that violates copyrights, it has to be completely different.  I'd be happy to help you create your user subpage, you can call it whatever you want and work on the article there for as long as you need until it's ready to go back to the main article space (where it was).  Let me know if you need any help with any of this.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  05:36, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. Much appreciated. I would be happy if you could help me set this up. The user subpage, etc. Yeah, I'm not sure why there was material from another website. Everything should have been from www.ascii.com.

Cheers  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CW221 (talk • contribs)
 * Sure, how about we set it up at User:CW221/ASCII Group? Problem is, it can't have the info from ascii.com either, since that page's copyright would prevent it.  There are complicated ways to get around this if you own the copyright, but it wouldn't be worth doing for these couple paragraphs, especially since they'll need to be changed to meet the other article standards (e.g. it needs to have a neutral tone and needs to assert why the group is notable.  Now you can either just click on the red link above I just created to get started or I can start the page for you with some random text (but you can do it yourself no problem, I'm sure). Once you have something written  I can also help with stuff like adding inline references and formatting it and everything.  The main thing to remember is this: Every article needs citations from reliable sources (e.g. magazines, news sites, books, newspapers) that talk about the subject. The sources need to be independent of the subject, so for example the company's or person's own website wouldn't work.  Every fact in the article needs to be referenced to a reliable source: that's super important because it ensures that articles are verifiable and don't contain false information. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  05:51, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

That sounds good... User:CW221/ASCII Group works for me. I will only include the link to the website in the article? But as you mentioned, not for referencing. Now I understand completely. I will do my best to source the information from independent reliable sources. Helping me with inline references and formatting would be greatly appreciated as well.

Best, Ben

Also, is there anyway to recover some of the information from the initial page that was deleted? The formatting of that page could be helpful, as well as some of the information that summarized ASCII. Let me know.


 * Terrific Ben, thanks so much for being so cool about this! Just drop a note on my talk page if you have any specific questions.  I can email you the old article so you can use the formatting and anything that's not taken from another site.  Do you have an email account set up?  (Don't write it here or the whole internet will see it and you'll start getting spam).  If you don't have an email account use Special:Emailuser/Delldot and I will reply to your email.  (by the way, you can sign your posts by typing ~ and the software will fill in your name and the time).  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! No Problem.. I don't have an email account set up on Wikipedia. Only gmail account.

CW221 (talk) 06:10, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I also just emailed you. Peace, CW221 (talk) 06:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Let me know if you received it.


 * Got it! I will reply in just a bit.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for emailing me the ASCII information. I will do my best to try setting up the new page on User:CW221/ASCII Group.

Hopefully you can help me along the way.

Cheers

CW221 (talk) 06:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For sure! Just drop me a note here if you need something.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Cool.

I did my best to revise the new ASCII page User:CW221/ASCII Group with 3 independent legitimate sources. Can you help me along the way, because I'm not sure if I cited the sources correctly? It still says there was an error with citations.

Thanks again! CW221 (talk) 07:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, I'm sure it's late where you are. I referenced the sources with a format from another page I found, but I still believe that it's not the correct format. I think the page it almost done. It would be great to fix the references, so the User page can be moved back to the formal Wikipedia ASCII page.

Thanks!

CW221 (talk) 07:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The reason it's giving you the red in the references section is that inside the cite web template you need to put |title=Name of article title | . I gotta go but can help more later. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  18:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for the information... I just finished correcting the referencing on the ASCII page... User:CW221/ASCII Group.

Everything else looks good to me to put back on the original page. Let me know if you can restore the user page back to the original ASCII Wikipedia page?

Thanks again!

CW221 (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Let me know when we can expect for the original page to be restored/ or if there is anything I need to do?

Cheers

CW221 (talk) 20:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey CW221, good work so far. I have some suggestions for changes before moving it back to the article space.  I'll leave these on the talk page of the user page, so the conversation doesn't keep having to take place over here.  I'll watchlist the page so I'll know if you've made any responses.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  22:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks... That sounds good. I just responded in the User talk page to start the conversation. I'm happy to hear about more suggestions for changes so we can move it back to the article space.

Best, CW221 (talk) 23:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Did I use the talk page for User:CW221/ASCII Group correctly?

CW221 (talk) 00:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I just wanted to check if you got my last message on the userpage?

Thanks CW221 (talk) 06:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Let me know if your able to put the ASCII site back up?

Thanks.

CW221 (talk) 17:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Kanuni
Thanks for the note. I already have some 5000 edits but still do not know how to do those things. Please do it for me. I doubt any objection will come, because that could be perceived (at least by me :-) to be an attitude to make Suleiman the Magnificent article of WP less easy to reach. Merry Christmas and all the best. --E4024 (talk) 13:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. It may be that someone objects to leaving a hatnote at the top of their FA, if it makes it look untidy or something.  But they can always revert it if they want, so I'm not going to worry about it.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  18:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Talk subpages
Thanks for your message. I moved the content into fewer archives, and it looks like another admin deleted them. All is good. Thanks.  Grsz 11 17:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, right on, sorry, I probably could have figured that out. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  18:10, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Help request
Could you give me a hand also in DAB Yedikule. No need for that page really. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Moving Article
Delldot,

If you could move the article to a subheading that'd be great. What would I need to do in order to officially repost the article? I was in the process of adding reference notes to the organizations coverage from various news sources such as the Hartford Courant, CT Post, and WSJ. Would those links be sufficient? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowguard5 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure, I can do that. Yes, reliable sources are the most important thing.  There also needs to be a claim to notability but that's basically covered if you can show that the group's been covered substantially in multiple reliable sources.  Reliable sources are things with editorial oversight, so it sounds like your newspaper sources are great (although I'm not familiar with them, as long as they're standard newspapers that should be fine).  There are other standards to meet, but I can help you as you work on the article, as I've been doing with CW221 in  above and in their userspace.  I'll go ahead and move that to your userspace now.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  04:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Ruger Red Label
The reason I put the tag up is that for every other firearm on the site that doesn't yet have a page, it is simply a red link, NOT a redirect. If you scroll through the Sturm, Ruger & Co. page that Ruger Red Label redirects to, it shows multiple red links including the Ruger Model 44, the Ruger Single Ten and the Ruger Super Blackhawk. This is the norm for the Firearms Project as it indicates that the page needs to made. Otherwise, people assume the page has been made until the click on it and get redirected (which was how I found out). --Zackmann08 (talk) 02:26, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hm, I see your reasoning. I don't think I can just speedy it though, since it's not a recently created redirect, I don't see any criteria it meets.  It still seems to me like the redir might be useful if someone types that in, they might want to end up at the page for the company.  What if we created a list at that wikiproject of articles that still need to be created?  That way we could make those other red links into potentially useful redirs too (and it wouldn't matter if someone in the future did that).  I mean, I'm not passionate about it either way, if you want to tag it again and see if someone else will speedy delete it, I'll leave it alone.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  02:33, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There is a list of articles already. I still feel that it is missleading to have it redirect as no other articles are done that way. --Zackmann08 (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, I hear you. I'm not sure what to do about it, I'm not comfortable deleting it myself but don't have any problem if someone else wants to.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  02:39, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Thanks for the input and for working with me. Hope you have a great holiday. --Zackmann08 (talk) 04:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
With Garifuna American. --Shirt58 (talk) 04:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thank you! I felt bad for doing hardly anything with it.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  04:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi There
Regarding the recent deletion please could you move to my sandbox ? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashishlohorung (talk • contribs) 05:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, not a problem, it's in User:Ashishlohorung/Sandbox. Please understand though that it's going to need evidence of notability and multiple, reliable sources.  Without that, if you move it to the article space, it will just be deleted again.  Thank you for working on this and making a contribution to the encyclopedia!  Let me know here if there's any way I can help you along the way!  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Please undelete page
I disagree with your speedy deletion of the Robb Alvey page. I significantly rewrote the article and added a number of references to it that weren't discussed in the original AfD. Therefore, it was not the same as the old version that was deleted. Please compare the two. Silver seren C 06:21, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hm, I didn't see a lot that looked too different from the deleted version, but I'll admit that the people in the deletion discussion weren't super specific about what they think would be needed to fix it. Neither is Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts/Robb Alvey super helpful.  What do you think you did to address the issues brought up in the AFD?  I will try to get other folks to look at it and see what they think about my decision.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:32, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's easy. I turned this, the userfied version of the article from when it was at AfD, into this. The changes should be rather obvious. Silver  seren C 06:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I did see those changes, none of them seem to me to make more of a claim to notability than the original. But if it's going to be controversial I guess the best would be to let it go through AFD again.  If I undelete it and put it up at AFD, would you accept the decision that comes down through that?  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:46, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would, i've been telling the IP that nominated it for speedy deletion to do that. But I have to ask, how does it not have a claim to notability, owning a website covered by a ton of sources for organizing roller coaster tours, being the host of a well watched television show that has a bunch of sources covering it, and also being a video game producer for Activision and being the producer of a number of acclaimed games? Silver  seren C 06:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem, that's what I'll do then. I guess the whole discussion can take place over there.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:53, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't forget to undelete the talk page. :3 Silver  seren C 07:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Er, yeah, sorry, I just got wrapped up in something else, will AFD in a bit too... delldot   &nabla;.  07:25, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

CoderDojo
Can you explain why you deleted CoderDojo. The deletion log just says 'multiple reasons'. Can you be more specific? ... CoderDojo is a requested article and has been reported in hundreds of newspapers including Forbes magazine. It has 122 clubs in 22 countries and 10,000 members. It is important. Seabhcan 12:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Seabhcan, I'm happy to explain. The reasons I deleted it were because I thought it read like an advertisement, and it didn't assert notability.  But I should have done a better search, I'm seeing some of the news sources you mentioned.  Since there are already two sources in the article, I guess it was a mistake for me to delete it, I should have improved it instead.  So I'm sorry, I'll go ahead and undelete.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:14, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Delldot. Thanks for undelete. I will attempt to improve the article. ... Seabhcan 00:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!
To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Question
I recently created Dream Stone Creations. I had not had a chance to work on it anymore before it was deleted as advertising. This article was to improve the coverage of faux painting, visual arts, and green remodeling. I had intended for some more information but I am new to the HTML and wanted to see if I was formatting correctly but thought it was only factual and conformed to the guidelines of Wikipedia, much like the Painting and Decorating Contractors of America. The additional information would include green painting practices and additional faux techniques not mentioned in other article using synthetic concretes. Please let me know if this is something that would be approved and if so what parts needs to be removed? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rablek (talk • contribs) 17:36, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, hi Rablek, thanks for the note. I deleted the article because I thought it did not make any assertion of notability.  To establish notability, you basically have to show that the company has been talked about a lot in reliable sources.  reliable sources (e.g. magazines, news sites, books, newspapers) that talk about the subject  I didn't know you weren't done working on it, sorry to delete it out from under you.   your userspace (that is, any page beginning with User:Rablek/... such as User:Rablek/Sandbox)  Let me know here if you need any help with the process!  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  00:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Question
I wrote an article last night regarding the record label Have 10p Records, run by Kate Nash and today I've found that you reported it and had it deleted due to its' being irrelevant. I completely disagree with you and would like you to justify this. I'd also like you to undelete it, as I believe you deleted it due to an error of judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigburrrns (talk • contribs) 21:20, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Craig, thanks for bringing this up. Yes, someone else reported the article and I deleted it, because I felt that it did not assert notability--That basically means that the subject needs to be talked about in multible, reliable sources, with significant coverage (as opposed to a passing mention).  I see that Kate Nash is a notable person, that could be a good start, but it doesn't make the label notable itself (by Wikipedia article standards I mean--no judgement on the label itself) because "notability is not inherited" (that is, something's doesn't necessarily become notable just because of its association with something that is.  But of course it's possible that the label is notable, and for the article to be kept there would just need to be a claim to that notability backed up with reliable sources.  reliable sources (e.g. magazines, news sites, books, newspapers) that talk about the subject  If you're interested in working on the article to make it meet the criteria I can help with that.  Let me know here if you have any questions or want to discuss anything.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  00:36, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Full Name of Titin
This is an essential resource, that wikipedia needs to have, if Wikipedia wants to be a worldwide reference source, you cannot leave out words — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakesyl (talk • contribs) 03:37, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Jake, please check out WP:RS and let me know if you have any more questions. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  03:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,   I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."  Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)  Moe Epsilon is wishing you a  Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

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


 * Thank you! Merry Xmas to you too.   delldot   &nabla;.  20:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Wiki language confusing for a newbie
Thanks for taking care of List of people on U.S. Bank Notes. I could not figure out how to go from Sandbox to article and landed in user. It's my first article/piece... Godot13 (talk) 22:32, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem, yeah, there's a dropdown box to the left of the field in the move page where you specify what "namespace" you want the thing to go to, so I find it very confusing too! Hopefully the title is good where it is, I changed my mind like 4 times!  Looks good though, thanks for contributing it.  The info is not copied word-for-word from anywhere, is it?  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  22:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The text is entirely written by me. The first few sentences of the first paragraph I've used on my website to describe portraits on bank notes. All associated images were also scanned by me at the Smithsonian. I think List of People on United States Bank Notes works well. Thanks for the help! Godot13 (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Awesome, think it'd be best to reword the first few sentences to be different from your website, or else put a note on your website releasing the material under a licence we can use like the creative commons, or send an email to wikipedia from that website giving permission to release it under such a license (obviously the first one would be way easier!) Copyright stuff is the biggest, most confusing pain on Wikipedia so don't worry, it's not all like that!  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  22:57, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Will reword ;-) But the article is not up, is it? Godot13 (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I started rewording it, I'll let you take it from here. It's up, it's actually List of people on United States Bank Notes, lower case P, if you link to it it's case sensitive.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:03, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help. I'll try working on the second half of the list for a table. I may reach out for help if it doesn't start to gel by the end of the week. Happy Holidays. Godot13 (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, just let me know here if you need anything. Glad you've joined the project!  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Question- One of the edits you made was about possible attribution (citing the National Currency Foundation website) but it shouldn't be included unless it could be cited elsewhere. The link http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/5998.php is a university website link that supports the attribution. Is something like this acceptable? Thanks!Godot13 (talk) 05:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, it's not an awful site, but it's not as good as a newspaper or magazine either in my opinion. I guess my main concern is how central is that project to the topic, people whose faces are on money?  The lead, that top section, is for summing up the highlights about the topic, the most important concepts about it.  Which you did really well with the rest of the lead I thought, e.g. they're politicians and military figures, etc.  I just don't think that info belongs in the lead. I could see it as a footnote, hence my attribution comment, especially if it's got a site that you could link to that would give the reader more in-depth information than we can fit in the article.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  05:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I get it... Mentioning the foundation website as a footnote would be okay, but don't insert it into text if it's not necessary... The national currency foundation website provides a more in-depth look at the actual notes themselves. I also have an informal understanding that if I write articles or publish images from the Smithsonian I will make every effort to cite them in the process. I will try and figure out how to do all of this in the most unobtrusive way...Godot13 (talk) 05:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I can look into this too, I'm not super familiar with attributing stuff like this but I know sometimes we'll use info from a freely licensed source and put at the bottom a little box that says "this article contains information from the Public Library of Science." or something to that effect. Let me see if I can find such a template for the Smithsonian and we can just pop that in there.  Or of course you could reference the website for any fact in the article it supports along with the other footnotes you already have. Check it out, there's a Smithsonian WikiProject, a collaboration of people interested in editing articles to do with the Smithsonian.  You can ask questions on  that talk page.  I'm glad to have you ask me questions too, but they might actually know the answers!   delldot   &nabla;.  06:07, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank for the help. I just submitted my 2nd article/blurb to the create page but realized that I could create it without that. Is there a way to undo the submit (from my sandbox) or do I just wait until it's processed? I can see how this could become a bit addictive...Godot13 (talk) 02:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I just went into your sandbox and removed the afc tag. That took it out of the category "Pending submissions".  Honestly, I'm not familiar with the AFC process any more, it's totally different than how it was when I used to do it and I find it baffling.  So hopefully that took it out but I can't swear 100%.  I'd say go ahead and move it if you think it meets reliability and notability standards (I haven't read it).  I'll try to look into the AFC process more and see if I can figure that sucker out.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  03:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * As always, your help is much appreciated...Godot13 (talk) 03:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

NCF
Hi Delldot- If you have a chance could you give me your opinion on a short description I wrote (and is under discussion for deletion). I'd like to know what (if anything) I can do to improve it... Much thanks for your help, Godot13 (talk) 18:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, sorry I didn't read it before you moved it, I probably could have given you this advice ahead of time. My suggestion is to get as many reliable sources as you can that talk about the foundation in detail, then use them in the article and list them at the AFD.  List them in a bulleted list, with a brief explanation of how the topic is covered in the source, so people don't have to go to a lot of trouble to verify that it's a  good source.  Reliable sources are those that have editorial review, like newspapers, magazines, news sites, and books.  If a source is just some website, it may (or may not) still be ok to include in the article, but don't include that in your list of reliable sources, since that's just going to muddy the waters and make people think none of the sources are that good.  If the Foundation's been talked about in well-known publications like the New York Times or Business Week, those are of course the best.  If it hasn't received significant coverage, you can always wait to have a Wikipedia article on it until it does get more written about it.  Did you read WP:ORG?  It might be worthwhile to give it a glance and see if you can show that the foundation meets the criteria.  But basically the deletion discussion is based on there not being enough reliable sources that cover the topic, so if you can show that it has received that kind of substantial coverage then I would assume you're good.   delldot   &nabla;.  20:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. This is a learning process ;-) Godot13 (talk) 06:52, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, happy to help any way I can, definitely let me know if you have any questions.  delldot   &nabla;.  07:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Delldot- Is it possible for a user to have more than one sandbox to work on a few projects simultaneously? Thanks! Godot13 (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, you can have as many as you want. I have like 15.  Basically any page beginning with User:Godot13/ is yours.  So you could do User:Godot13/sandbox 2, User:Godot13/sandbox 3, etc, or you could do like [[User:Godot13/numismatics or whatver name you want to use.  Just pick a name, go to that page, and start it the way you would create any page.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  01:18, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated!Godot13 (talk) 01:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Delldot- Thanks for your offer. So long as it is appropriate protocol, could you please USERFY the National Currency Foundation article until such time as it may meet the notability criteria. Thanks! Godot13 (talk) 03:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Kerala Cardamom Processing and Marketing Company Ltd
No problem with declining the speedy for notability, but we still have what appears to be a straight copyvio from here. Tonywalton Talk 01:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Gasp! Thank you for catching that and letting me know about it.  Was it just that one sentence that I removed?  I can't find anything else.  The thing's so borderline, you think it should go to AFD?  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  01:30, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wasn't me, TBH, it was User:Bbb23 (check the talkpage). I'd be reasonably happy to let the page stand in terms of notability. but as I understand it Wikipedia has to be very careful about copyvio, so... Tonywalton Talk 01:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, absolutely, good lookin' out.  delldot   &nabla;.  01:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Author requested deletion on talk page, so I went ahead and deleted.  delldot   &nabla;.  02:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Personally, I feel the article doesn't violate copyright, It just interpret what was said in their offical website at kcpmc.in/ and added some reliable references. However thanks for deleting it to avoid further debate. --Neechalkaran (talk) 21:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well thank you for being so cool about avoiding debate, we need more people like you on the project! I think we did well to remove it if there's any chance it could get us in trouble, as Tonywalton said we need to be really careful about copyrights.  But all we have to do is take out any sentences that are too closely worded to the published text, so rewording it would be fine.  If you like I can email you the source page so you can salvage anything you want to reword and anything that was already entirely in your own words.  But please don't put the text that was copied from anywhere back up.  (Don't put your email address here though, or the whole Internet will see it; instead you can use the Special:emailuser/Delldot function to email me and I will reply.) You can put the new article in a subpage of your user page, such as user:Neechalkaran/Cardamom to work on it as long as you need to before moving it back to where it was.  Let me know here if you need any other help.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wot 'e said. I'll also happily make the text available to you, but it either needs (and that's a legal "needs", the alternative being "Wikipedia could be brought down by lawyers for breaching copyright") to be a different text or for the text to be formally released as per WP:COPYVIO. Ridiculous, I know, but the same rules apply to your work as would apply to, say, the music to My Sweet Lord, and look what happened there. Tonywalton Talk 00:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Needy Readers
I need help on Citing my page Needy Readers. Needy Readers is a program which is launched by IMCD (www.imcds.org) This Project collects any stationary item form people which can be reused and distribute among rural schools and poor students. we have a twitter handle https://twitter.com/NeedyReaders as well as facebook page www.facebook.com/NeedyReaders

So we hope to implement a wiki page on Needy Readers on wikipedia. So please help me to publish the wiki on wikipedia correctly. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayaneethatj (talk • contribs) 08:56, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey Jayaneethat, yeah, I read the article, it looks like a really great and necessary program. It's similar to what Wikipedia is working to do as a project, bringing knowledge to people for free!  I think it would be great for the program, there are just some standards every article needs to meet in order to be kept in Wikipedia.  reliable sources (e.g. magazines, news sites, books, newspapers) that talk about the subject  If you can find enough reliable sources to write an article in which each fact is sourced, that would be great.  Also, each article needs to have a neutral tone, and not sound too praising (or disparaging) of the subject; it can't sound like an advertisement for the group.  Anyway, so I'm happy to help you, of course I'm also going to insist on having those reliable sources.  So I think the first step to do is an Internet search and try to find articles written about the program in independent sources with editorial review (so some random website is not as good because we don't know how much to trust it).  Another rule is that the coverage needs to talk about the program substantially, not just a passing mention.   If we can find about three sources like that, I'd say the article is a go, we can go ahead and create it.  Otherwise, we can always wait until the program does receive coverage in the press and then make the article.  You can link me to any articles you find either here on my talk page or on yours or anywhere in your userspace, just drop me a note here and let me know. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies for following up on someone else's talkpage but you may have missed the point of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopædia. As such it documents already-existing information, it is not meant to promote anything. Tonywalton Talk 00:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, it's definitely been a while. Yes, I'm still doing GANs once in a while, though I gave up on keeping the backlog down long ago :/. I mostly work on copyright issues nowadays. Seems like a couple users from way back are returning, which is nice to see. Wizardman 16:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Pleasure to hear from you, thanks for dropping by. :)  delldot   &nabla;.  06:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

List of people on United States Bank Notes
Hey Delldot. I'm taking your advice to fine-tune my list. I looked at a lot of examples from the Featured List category to see how it's done. The more complex formats had me pulling my hair out. It's just in the beginning phase (lots to be done) but if you have a chance to take a look (Sandbox3) I'd appreciate your very rough impression (is this the right direction). Thanks! Godot13 (talk) 07:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks great! I know you can put smaller tables inside the fields of a bigger table, if you want separate fields for like birth date, etc.  But maybe that's the kind of thing you were saying was frustrating (I can relate).  Why is the Title/Comments field so big?  There's so little text in it.  As long as it's in your sandbox you can mess with it for as long as you like until you get it just how you want it.  Only thing is, if someone updates the live article, you'll have to incorporate those updates (assuming they're good and should be kept) into your sandbox version before moving it back over, or yours will wipe out their new edits.  So that's a bit of a pain if someone makes a lot of changes, but they probably won't.  You know what might be a good idea is to periodically update the list page in the article space.  I mean, I like the table format better than the text format, why not update it to that now?  Then you can keep making changes in your sandbox and if you get something even better you can update it again.  I think as long as you're the only one working in your sandbox, there's no need to use the move tool, you can just cut and paste it (if it was multiple contributors you would need to use the move tool to preserve the page histories for attribution of the work).  delldot   &nabla;.  19:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Really good suggestions... I was thinking that the space in Title/Comments could be used for additional key facts or major accomplishments and I would tailor the length of the comments to neatly fit in the box so that the end product was very visually appealing. If this turns out to feel too artificial, then I'll make the text box smaller (which I have no idea how to do right now). It was the table in tables that nearly caused my computer to go flying out the window ;-) I am the only one working in any of my sandboxes, so I'll take your advice and simply copy and paste the whole new version on top of the old version (all information is still intact). Thanks for the feedback! Godot13 (talk) 20:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, just check the article history (history tab at the top) to make sure you're not wiping out anyone else's good changes. You know about the rowspan and colspan parameters?  You don't have to put a table into your table, you can make some of the fields be taller or wider than others (so you could have four rows on top of each other for birth date, death date, etc, then for the picture you could set that one to be rowspan=4.  I'm rusty about the actual syntax, if Help:Table doesn't explain it let me take a look and try and figure it out.  I have never been able to get the table within table thing to work either.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  21:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for the barnstar. Hope you and yours have a happy new year! — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, thank you!  delldot   &nabla;.  01:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Adanlaserpente.jpg
Hey, Delldot!

I spoke with you briefly over IRC, but I'd like to ask you to undelete File:Adanlaserpente.jpg. I've been adding infoboxes to film articles, and this was the next one in queue. Thanks, ~ Matthewrbowker  Make a comment! 07:07, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Someone beat me to it, thanks for leaving the note like I asked though!  delldot   &nabla;.  07:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem at all, thanks for the help! ~ Matthewrbowker  Make a comment! 07:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, any time you want me to not do anything for you, just let me know ;) delldot   &nabla;.  07:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Early closes
You may have gotten the days at the end of the month mixed up; it has happened to me. You've been making some AfD closes after 6 days, not 7. I know it's frustrating when there's just a few hours to go, but once it happens, it's easy to drift. There's all the more reason to wait the full time during a holiday period where many people are much less active.  DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, shoot, I'm sorry. Should I leave them, or go back and do something to open them back up?  I doubt anything would have changed in the next few hours, both closes I just did were pretty obvious.  What do you think?   delldot   &nabla;.  01:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd leave them. The closes were good ones otherwise, and I agree with you that no harm was done by it. I only left the note so you wouldn't accidentally go on to do   more of them  DGG ( talk ) 01:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, for sure, thanks much. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  01:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Question
Hey! I was just wondering, I found these templates at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace/Multi-level_templates and if I need to use them, can I or are they only for administrators or other people? Thanks!!

Matthew9543 (talk) 16:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, good question Matthew. Sure you can use them, just make sure you read the policies that each one links to before you use it so you can make sure you're using it on the right person's talk page.  (I mean, for example, make sure you read and understand WP:VAN before you put a vandalism warning on someone's page, because it could get you in trouble to use one on someone who was making edits in good faith.  If you have any questions about a particular template and case for using it, feel free to ask me or any other experienced user.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  16:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Wow, thank you so much! I saw the orange box and was like, gulp, what does someone want to say to me about my CSD closures? Yeah, a bot will empty and merge and delete the categories, no problem.  Thanks again! :D  delldot   &nabla;.  16:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Follow up from no consensus at CFD
You recently closed (as no consensus) a CfD discussion that hinged on the question of whether the cat was a "Non-defining characteristic" or not. Given this lack of consensus, I have started a follow up discussion. See: Wikipedia_talk:Overcategorization. Please share your thoughts. Blueboar (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Moshe Friedman/Holocaust Denial
Can you visit Moshe Friedman page holocaust denial.Tellyuer1 (talk) 04:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

please reconsider article for publishing
Hi-

After reviewing your comments, I've made some edits and am trying to resubmit the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Hands_(band).

However, when I click "click here" (near the top of the page, to resubmit articles) I'm taken to a blank template. I just scrolled to the bottom of this new blank template and clicked "save page". Should I have copied and pasted all of the text and links from my newly edited article to this blank template, or did I already correctly resubmit my article?

Thanks for your help.

Gray Gannaway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graygannaway (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Gray, thanks for the note. Looks like you resubmitted the request fine.  Looks like someone else already reviewed the submission again today.  They said it was very close to being accepted.  I will let you take a look at that, then let me know if you have any other questions. I'm happy to help if you need anything. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  01:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!
Aw, thank you JFW! So good to hear from you! delldot  &nabla;.  17:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks like you're still into trauma. Excellent. JFW &#124; T@lk  20:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, not so much at the moment, I just copy edited that one article for someone. I'm mainly working on maintenance stuff at the moment but would like to get back into article writing at some point.  It's been so long I feel out of touch with medicine.  What have you been working on lately?   delldot   &nabla;.  22:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Resuscitative thoracotomy
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Addictive personality, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Habit, Deviance and Nonconformity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

deleted ABRANTEE BOATENG
This person has had major mainstream media coverage especially in the past 2 years articles in the guardian and evening standard about him. Please re-ensatate the page as a matter of urgency. As the subject is a public figure — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giverandnotataker (talk • contribs) 00:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Giver, thanks for the note. I'm not the one who deleted this originally, but I do know you can't keep creating the same article once it's been through a deletion discussion--there's a process we have to go through to make sure things are done fairly and agreed upon by the community.  I see you added a couple sources, that's great, but I'm not sure the sources are reliable, some look like they're just websites.  The Guardian one is good though. It looks like we might be able to find enough info on him to write a well sourced article.  How about this: for right now, let's move it into your userspace (any page beginning User:Giverandnotataker/, e.g. User:Giverandnotataker/Abrantee Boateng.  There we can work on it and add sources until it's definitely referenced enough to stand up to another deletion discussion.  We can ask people who participated in the original discussion to make sure they agree and the article can be moved back into the main article space.  Doing this will take more time but it will avoid your article just being deleted again and again, and will avoid people getting mad.  I'm happy to help if you do it that way.  I'm not comfortable with trying to get around the deletion process by letting it just be recreated more or less as it was though.  What do you say?  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  04:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Your user name
I just wanted to say you have an awesome user name. Do you have a background in mathematics/science, or did you just see the symbol one day? Inks.LWC (talk) 18:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Aw, thank you! The symbol was actually used to represent me by someone with a math background!  I've kept it around ever since.   delldot   &nabla;.  18:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of category LGBT astronauts
Could you please relist the deletion discusion for Category:LGBT_astronauts? This deletion was made with extremely low participation, and it didn't have into account the numerous reliable sources that establish the cross-category as a notable one (see ,,, ). In the light of this new evidence, I'd like to have a more thorough participation with more editors. Or maybe a deletion review is a better way to assess the additional evidence? Diego (talk) 14:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Diego, thanks for the note. I don't think DRV is the right venue, there it would just be decided whether that discussion had really had consensus, and it was a pretty obvious close from that discussion.  I think your best bet would be to start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies about whether the cat should be recreated (I would say Category talk:LGBT people by occupation but doubtful anyone watches that page).  Since it's just a category, no more than a couple parent categories and lines of text, I can't see an important difference between undeleting and recreating it, can you?  So if you gain consensus at the WikiProject that it should exist I see no problem with recreating it.  You might also note that there were other LGBT by occupation categories up for discussion on that log and maybe other nearby days, e.g. linguists and psychologists.  Good luck with the discussion, let me know if I can be of any help.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  21:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi! The problem with recreating is that I don't know what was in it. I'll try the project page, the discussion about the group deletion of categories is ongoing. A temporary userfication of the category could help to assess what was in it before being deleted. Thx. Diego (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Well since the edits are to the articles to place them in the category rather than to the category itself, undeleting the cat wouldn't help with that either.  What we could do though is look at the edit history of the bot that emptied it right before the cat was deleted (or the admin who deleted it).  I bet with a little detective work we can figure out what all was taken out of it.  But might as well get consensus to recreate first.  But yeah, if I'm missing something, I'm happy to temporarily userfy the cat if you like.  (Of course, then it would be in the User namespace and not a category any more).  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  22:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see. Can you try the "Related changes" special page for the category? Maybe that could show what articles contained the category. Diego (talk) 22:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem to work for categories that articles have already been removed from, were you able to get it to work? Anyway, I looked at the deleting admin's contribs from right before they deleted it and this was the only edit related to it.  That makes me assume that that had been the only member of the category.  (Unless some weirdness went on like other people were removing members from the cat before the close of the discussion.)  To repopulate it I think it would have to be manual, e.g. google LGBT astronauts.   delldot   &nabla;.  22:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. Diego (talk) 23:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Surname disambiguation pages
It would seem the decision to keep Category:Surname disambiguation pages means people think that when surname is entered into the disambiguator id with the disambiguator notice it should link to that page and not the general category surnames. Is there a way to create or suggest this change. It seems odd that disambiguator notices are linking to a general category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hm, if I'm understanding your question right, you're saying, since the discussion was closed as keep that shows a consensus not to put dab pages into non-dab surname cats, and you want a way to communicate to people who are still doing that about this consensus. Right?  I can't think of a general way.  I guess I'd just talk to each person you find doing this.  Is it a lot of different people? There's also been a lot of discussion at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation, could leave a note there about it.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  02:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!
Thank YOU, it was a pleasure working with you again. delldot  &nabla;.  16:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Pregnancy from rape
Thanks for your suggestions. I agree with many of them and will begin to work through them. I agree the topic is interesting and I look forward to any other comments on improving the article.Casprings (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Forgot to signCasprings (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Absolutely, thank you for considering them, I'm really looking forward to seeing what it turns into, and I'm excited to help out if you need it. Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  02:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with most your comments additional comments. I wish I had more time to edit, as I also agree this will be a very good article with work.  I do hope you will help out in improving it. I will give some feedback on a point by point basis (and make changes to the article) over the next few days/weeks.  Thanks again.


 * That said, if you are in on helping in the article, I think the place to start is the organization. I always think article organization is the first thing and then build off of that.  That said, I agree with your comments on the organization and if I get a chance tomorrow I think I will try to improve the organization of the article.    Casprings (talk) 04:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * For sure, thank you for being so cool about it. I'm down to help out, and I'm happy to have you let me know what kind of help you want.  Yeah, I agree organization is a good starting point, maybe I'll propose changes to the structure on the talk page.   delldot   &nabla;.  04:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I saw your recent work on the article. That is a massive improvement.  Casprings (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Aw, thank you! I still want to keep working on it, especially starting to cut it down in some of the longer sections and maybe add some info about the subjects I mentioned that don't have coverage yet, e.g. slavery.   delldot   &nabla;.  17:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Vulkaneifel-geo-stub
Hi Delldot, regarding your closure at Vulkaneifel_geography_stubs Cfd I, and I believe also Dawynn, intended 'upmerge template' to mean 'do not delete the template, upmerge it to the parent category' with the result that the templates appearance or presense on the articles is not altered, but the category it includes them in is changed. Sorry for the confusion - this is the language commonly used at WP:WSS. which I now realise is a little different to how it might be taken at CfD.

Looking through the articles with the former template, actually, I don't think a single one of them is actually still stub length (something I did not check on at all at Cfd: IIRC I only looked for untagged stubs and looked at surrounding category structure and articles such as Vulkaneifel itself to understand the geography of the region). In that case, I suppose, it is not particularly important short term if the template exists or not. --Qetuth (talk) 06:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry, I really should have asked someone about this or left it alone since I really wasn't sure about whether or not to delete the template. I can undelete it and just retarget the category, no problem.  I noticed that all the articles it was on weren't stub length too, so I can take it off of them.  Thanks for letting me know and for being so nice about it.   delldot   &nabla;.  14:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Greek loanwords
Hi Delldot. I want to request a deletion review for Category:Greek loanwords: It was one of a series of many categories by language and a sub-category of Category:Indo-European loanwords (it also includes Celtic, Germanic, Hindi, Iranian, Latin, Romance, Romani, Slavic and Urdu loanwords) which is a sub-category of the parent Category:Loanwords. The category was wrongly nominated for deletion, considering that it had valid categorization and was a significant part of a large series. Macedonian (talk) 23:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, that's cool, is there anything you need me to do, or are you just going to take it to DRV? Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  03:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I guess you see my point... Well, I'm actually following the instructions: "discuss the matter with the closing administrator and try to resolve it with him or her first". So what shall we do? Should I take it to deletion review anyway, or will you undelete it? Macedonian (talk) 06:28, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, the purpose of deletion review is to figure out if there was consensus in that deletion discussion. I thought there was consensus (well, obviously), so I'm loathe to just reverse that.  But if there's a broader context that I didn't take into account, hopefully others in the community will see that.  I guess DRV would be the right place to figure that out.  So I say go ahead and DRV it.  (If I recall correctly, the nom was going to use that cat as a test case and nom other cats in that tree too, so I'm not sure if the existence of the rest of the tree is a good argument. But anyway, that can get discussed at the DRV).  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  06:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks delldot, I'll do that. Macedonian (talk) 07:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just noticed your argument, please don't misunderstand me, I'm not claiming that you did something wrong, you just followed the consensus. Perhaps I wrongly asked for a deletion review? Should I better take it to Requests for undeletion? Macedonian (talk) 07:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, DRV was definitely the wrong place, I will take it to Requests for undeletion. I apologise for the mess! Macedonian (talk) 07:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * So I did, but apparently Requests for undeletion was the wrong place and they redirect me to DRV. So here we go again...
 * Yeah, I think you did fine. I should have been clearer above--I think DRV is the right place to figure out whether not just consensus of the discussion was judged correctly but also whether the broader context around fits with that. Because the closer isn't supposed to look at the one discussion like it's an isolated, encapsulated thing taking place in a vacuum.  Plus, it looks like the attention the DRV has brought has unearthed some new info, so good job.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  15:05, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Greek loanwords
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Greek loanwords. 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. Macedonian (talk) 10:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Association for Interactive Media & Entertainment
Hey, going to reply on here as you suggested. I've spent some time adding independent references to the article and removed most of the internal links to the organisations website. i think i may need to add more...but would like to see if what i've done is what you were pointing me towards. thanks! Ryanthomashall (talk) 10:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey again Ryan, thanks for the note. Looking better, for sure.  I think it's good to remove the links to the company's own website if it's for information that isn't written anywhere else.  Because the way we gauge whether something's notable is by whether independent sources have written about it.  I think news sources are your best bet for establishing notability, especially sources like magazines and newspapers, because they have editorial review, so there's someone whose job it is to make sure what they write is accurate.  It's not great to have random websites as your sources, you know?  If it's info from another business's publication, I think it's kind of meh as a reliable source.  Because there's nothing to ensure that info is accurate.  You can check out the reliable sources page I linked you to for more detail on that.  I looked at the mobilemarketingmagazine site, it looked ok.  This one looks like it's the company's own publication, so it's not independent.  I can't see this one it's for subscribers only, I wonder if there's somewhere online where the article is cached or archived?   I'm not sure this one is a reliable source, it looks like just a random website maybe. econsultancy.com/uk looks better than a random website, but maybe not as good as a news source, but I'd have to look into it more to be sure.  hmg.tv looks like a good news source.  This one may be another case of random website or other business.  My general advice is to look for info from news sources, magazines, news sites, newspapers, etc.  Anyway, hope that's helpful, I'm happy to check in with you or help out with whatever you need.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  17:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Editing Images in Articles
Hi Delldot- Thanks for your help earlier. I'm in the middle of FLC review on List of people on United States banknotes. I've uploaded lots of images to Commons and have been looking around at articles. I've found that many images are stuck in an article, in places or sections they don't belong, just so someone could put them there. I know the Wikipedia motto is be bold. I've replaced images with very similar but significantly higher quality photos. Where does one draw the line for removing tangential or section-irrelevant images? If this is a type of admin function, can one "apply" for it? Thanks, Godot13 (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, removing an image from an article isn't an admin function, anyone can do it. I think if you come across an image you think is not appropriate for that section, or if you have a better one, definitely go ahead.  If you want to be careful, leave a detailed edit summary explaining why you took it out, and to be SUPER careful you can also leave a note on the talk page explaining and offering to revert and discuss if anyone objects.  I really doubt anyone's going to get mad at you for this, but you could also pay attention to the article history and see if that particular article is someone's baby, like they're editing it a lot, or taking it through GAN or PR etc.  If that's the case you might decide to leave a note on the talk page first and see what they say before removing it.  But yeah, honestly I wouldn't bother with all that, those exceptions are pretty rare, I think BOLD is generally a good idea--if someone hates it they can revert it then discuss it with you.  Good luck! Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  15:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice, much appreciated! Godot13 (talk) 21:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Wiki-kitten (the kitten anyone can play with) and I just wanted to say thanks for your hard work on reviews, and my apologies for being cranky during your latest. Your efforts are hugely appreciated! --

Khazar2 (talk) 22:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC) 
 * Daww. Thank you so much!  No need to apologize, you did great.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  23:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Ivan Mirzoev
Issues fixed. Proudbolsahye (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sexual violence in Haiti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Genital mutilation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Sexual violence in Haiti
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Slavery in Haiti
Hello! Your submission of Slavery in Haiti at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Cúchullain t/ c 22:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Reception
I'm not really that good with reception sections. Do you think I've included relevant information or should I strip it? Is it balanced? Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 17:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, what's up Simply south, actually I was thinking that 3 sentences about Dunlop's opinion was a bit much, maybe you should take out the one about 'it had only won due to the speech', and maybe the last one too? I'd go for more of a touching on more people's opinions rather than going into depth on this one guy's.  But I guess it would also depend on how close he is to the project, and what the sources are saying, to decide how much weight to give him.  In other news, like with the quote I mentioned on the DYK page, I'd say to put anything that's a direct quote in quotation marks, e.g. the thing from the politician, "fitting, in such an iconic location, novel and inspirational".  And the previous sentence, "futuristic and forward looking", or is that a paraphrase?  Anyway I can't see any big problems, it didn't seem to have NPOV problems or anything.  Let me know if I can offer more advice though, I appreciate you asking.  Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  22:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * In the DYK I was going to ask something about my own hook as for some reason I felt uneasy on the way it was worded but adding "about" made it all better. I hope this was okay. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 22:52, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually I may remove that Scottish politician part as the source says "Leading Scotsman" which makes it slightly ambiguous as to who it means so I took a guess. Or have I got it right? I also don't really know how close the architects are to the project. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 23:01, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Huh, tough question. I wonder why the source didn't identify him?   With the architects I guess if it's not clear how close they are to the project I wouldn't lean too heavily on them, but I would think one sentence each wouldn't be too much.  But this is really your call, I'm sure whatever you decide is cool.   delldot   &nabla;.  05:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Slavery in Haiti, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Armada and Undocumented (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Slavery in Haiti
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 5 March 2013 (UTC)