User talk:Fish and karate/Archive 29

Alansohn
That you for conducting the mediation of the article Dane Rauschenberg. The article has been relatively stable since the mediation until the past few months when several IP editors have offered edits that can be characterized as pro-Rauschenberg modifications. The IP addresses correspond to cities where Rauschenberg claims to be located on his blog.

The logical response would be to discuss the changes on the talk and then remove the edits, and that has generally worked. However, recently the one year civility probation of User:Alansohn has expired, and he is back on the talk page with some very incivil comments. For example, "has descended from pathetic to disgusting..."

He has also listed all of the pro-mediation results editors in a big "sockpuppet" complaint. Anything you can do to keep this civil would be appreciated. This is not an edit war, because most of it is not done by changes to the article, but rather by throwing down insults on the talk page. 158.59.27.249 (talk) 18:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no dog in this hunt, other than the creation of a reliably-sourced article for a clearly notable individual. Despute Racepacket's persistent denials, I have created an article that bears primarily my efforts to add reliable and verifiable sources and removed unsupported claims. I had filed an earlier sockpuppet complaint at Requests for checkuser/Case/Pats2001 trying to weed out problems on both "sides" which resulted in eight users on both "sides" being blocked. Since the start of Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg, User:Racepacket has used innumerable sockpuppets to votestack there and to edit war at Dane Rauschenberg, repeatedly violating the basic rules of Wikipedia by falsely projecting consensus by portraying the same viewpoint as coming from multiple editors. Racepacket has been caught repeatedly with his pants down and has been rather effusive in denying some of the clearest evidence of sockpuppetry that I have ever seen in my years on Wikipedia. Racepacket's socks now repeat the claim that the reason that an AfD can't be opened to address repeated claims of non-notability is that Rauschenberg will deal violently with whoever opens an AfD. I find it appalling that someone with such a blatant axe to grind is abusing your time to try to blame the person who caught him red handed. Are there other socks? Perhaps. But let's finally deal with someone who needs to be eliminated from Wikipedia as soon as possible and has not stopped this abuse after being caught and blocked on multiple occasions. Alansohn (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Cleaning out old accounts
Hey, how have you been. I was going through old talk pages and found two dead accounts that might need be deleted (a third one has already been deleted): User:Werewolfman07 is a sockpuppet account I actually did use :-).  I dont recall the password and can't even get into the account anymore - best that it just be deleted, can you do that?  You will also find it amusing (I think) that I did at last get the full story about User:CamelCommodore (thank God thats been deleted) and it was exactly what I thought - Senior Chief Petty Officer IT technician in my command stirring up the worst kind of trouble.  I found out he was hacking into all our e-mails, had most of our Wikipedia passwords and could see everythng we were doing.  In the end, we all got VPN's and that put an end to that.  The CC account is already gone so no harm there.  One last question for you is what to do about this guy's account. No activity since "the saga" and appears to have run away from Wikipedia screaming. I personally dont like the existence of this account since there was alot of fishy stuff going on and the entire deal about the Silver Star awarded to a deceased family member just didnt ring true. People will go to thier grave thinking that was me, but I can prove quite obviously it wasnt (wasnt in the Middle East anymore when most of those posts were made from Dubai) and dont like it that there are talk page histories directly accusing me of breaking Federal law (Stolen Valor Act). I think now it might have been someone who knew me but I just dont know. Are we allowed to delete it? Might be best for everyone. So, anway, here I am still here and most of the people who wanted my head are banned, retired, or just plain gone. How funny is that. Thanks for ALL your help back in the dark days. Best -OberRanks (talk) 03:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Accounts cannot be deleted. If you mean their user pages and talk pages be deleted, then that is for the account holder (the confirmed accoutn holder) to request. fish &amp;karate 14:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Werewolfman was created by me but I have long since lost the password and the e-mail address it links to was deactivated over a year ago. The other account, since it was created by another party (whoever that may be) I guess I'll just let that drop. Thanks for your help both now and then. Best. -OberRanks (talk) 18:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI
. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh for goodness sake, Andy. Stop reacting to him - I imagine the only reason you saw that edit is because you are watching his contributions.  I suggest you stop doing so. fish &amp;karate  14:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You asked me to draw such instances to your attention; and undertook to take action if they recurred. I, perhaps foolishly, took you at your word. And your imagination is faulty. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:TheStig.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:TheStig.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

File:TheStig.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:TheStig.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Stifle (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

List of Dictators which you commented on in the last AFD is up for deletion again Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Dictators
You are welcome to comment about the discussion for deletion. Ikip (talk) 09:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:WarMemor.jpg
File:WarMemor.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:War Memorial Churchyard of Constantine Kerrier.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Constant vandalism and disruption
I don't understand why you admins turn blind to when he goes around use sockpuppets in your faces and vandalize pages after pages. Is Wikipedia some type of gang related website? User:Tajik is removing sourced material from articles, this is vandalism and you admins allow it. He uses the excuse "falsification and POVs" but it's really him doing those if you concentrate on his edits. These are only few examples:, , , , He and  (sockpuppet of Anoshirawan) pops up as a tag-team and usually at the same time, I believe that account is shared by him and someone in USA who's English is not so great. It's so strange that he comes everyday but only edit very little, so it's very likely that he's using sockpuppets to evade his 1 RR restriction. Tajik pretends that he is against POVs but it's he that is a POV pusher."The author - in this case al-Biruni - is referring to the Suleiman Mountains. In that case, it is highly probable that he was referring to Pashtuns, because he had described them as a "Hindu people" before.... Tajik (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)". It's very clear for readers here that Tajik hates Pashtuns with great passion so he wants to give them a new history which would make them being Hindus when all the scholars, history books, encyclopedias, and the Pashtuns themselves, disagree. There is "zero traces" of any Hindu culture among the Pashtuns. Anyway, Tajik was blocked 17 times and banned for a whole year but he doesn't seem to care about any of that, he just wants to remove things from articles that he doesn't agree with or doesn't like. This is a serious problem and you guys should put an end to it. I also believe is him.

Your old RFA standards
What were your RFA standards that you used to have, referred to such as here. --SmokeyJoe (talk)

RfD nomination of What is a planet
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. December21st2012Freak  Talk to me at ≈ 21:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Belated RfA news
Just letting you know that WP:Requests for adminship/SMcCandlish 2 goes live today. You (as User:Neil) had previously offered to nominate me, on October 2007 (I was not then in a position to accept), so I thought you might like to be notified. PS: I"m shamelessly ripping you off. :-) —  SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 20:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Fish and karate! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 12 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:


 * 1) Miloš Prica -
 * 2) Lublin Dilja -
 * 3) Caroline Millar -
 * 4) Andrzej Towpik -
 * 5) Gunter Pleuger -
 * 6) Euphrase Kezilahabi -
 * 7) Hayam Abbas Al-Homi -
 * 8) Zakes Mda -
 * 9) Annie Holland -
 * 10) Daniel Woodgate -


 * 11. Chris Foreman

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 13:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

List of one-time characters in The Simpsons
I have relisted List of one-time characters in The Simpsons for deletion. Apparently this was one discussed before when it was known as List of one-time characters from The Simpsons. Most people have left the project since the list was known by that name. I see that you are still active and wanted to notify you of this posting. JBsupreme ( talk ) 17:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

MWB
I think you've erred here; I did not remove a reference as "not needed" and then remove the text it supported as unreferenced. Rather, I removed both the reference and the text simultaneously, on the grounds that the reference was not an appropriate one. Steve Smith (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * My point is that, in deciding what merits inclusion when writing about living people (and most other issues, actually), we should generally confine ourselves to what secondary sources have considered worth mentioning. If it's important that Kohs goes by Thekohser, some secondary source should have mentioned it.  Digging around people's internet footprint, even on sites they happen to run, in an effort to find information to add to Wikipedia articles about them is at best distasteful. Steve Smith (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Digging implies the information was unsavoury, and covered-up. Not really the case, Steve. fish &amp;karate  13:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Lift to Experience
Would you kindly userfy Lift to Experience for me, thanks? this is a pretty notable band, reviewed by Pitchfork, etc. I can't believe it's stayed deleted this long to be quite honest, but I can probably get it to proper specs. thanks! riffic (talk) 05:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Peter Holmes a Court and JzG
Would you take a look at the activities of users Guy and JzG in relation to the Peter Holmes a Court entry. It seems editors are now being banned for providing referenced material and that valid links are being interfered with and then listed as 'dead links'. When an editor tries to add new information that is referenced and verifiable this is being removed and users/editors being banned. I see that JzG and Guy seem to have some relationship and that JzG has a 'past'. The entry in question has also been the victim of sockpuppetry but that appears to have been dealt with. Appreciate any assistance you can provide.Edasent (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Please be aware you are one of seven people Edasent has contacted about this matter. There may be an element of forum shopping. Stifle (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You can check the talk page associated with Peter Holmes a Court which should be addressing some of Stifle concerns. Edasent (talk) 13:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I am making changes to the Peter Holmes a Court entry based on material asked for by Stifle and provided on the relevant discussion page associated with the entry. I would appreciate it if you wandered by this page once in a while to watch proceedings. Edasent (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Soccerpulse
Back in 2006, you contributed to the AFD discussion for this article. The article has since been re-created, and I have re-nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Soccerpulse (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 16:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Swamilive/Scottish Coke
I have requested a checkuser take a look at both accounts and see if they can't shut down some of the socks in wait and do a rangeblock as well. Thanks for taking care of Scottish Coke. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 06:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, you might want to protect the talk page of Scottish Coke after messages like this. Not getting into an edit war over them. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 06:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Had the talk page protected by another admin for abuse of talk page. Working on a checkuser and rangeblocks.  Might be futile, but it couldn't hurt. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 06:50, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Since you had some involvement with the The board of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Robofish (talk) 15:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Beats of Rage
May I ask why did you delete Beats of Rage, it is a very noteable and recognizable homebrew game, it has received online, print and television coverage.--Cube b3 (talk) 23:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not in 2007, it hadn't, when it was deleted. By all means feel free to recreate the article, citing this coverage as evidence of its notability. fish &amp;karate  07:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

List of legally mononymous people
You may be interested in List of legally mononymous people, and helping to expand it. Thanks, Sai Emrys ¿? ✍ 19:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Yerf listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Yerf. Since you had some involvement with the Yerf redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team wants You!
Hi Fish and Karate,

I saw some of your contributions on a pretty obscure article that falls within the scope of Wikiproject: United States Public Policy (history of ballot security), that kind of detailed expertise would be valuable to the project, and I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the | Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:59, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Loglan 88 for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Loglan 88, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Loglan 88 until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion
Hello Fish and karate,

I was wondering why you deleted the Wickaninnish Inn article (I know it's been awhile, so you may not remember), and what we need to to to make it acceptable?

Also, do you know how we can access the original content? Thanks for your help!

207.194.38.4 (talk) 18:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Universal Edit Button for deletion
The article Universal Edit Button is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Universal Edit Button until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Merrill Stubing (talk) 14:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm your membership
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 20:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Proto.

Jean Bart image
Seeing the issue at Delta's page, and your claim it is in the PD: I did an Google Image search and affirmed there is actually an artist, Henri Le Monnier, that is affirmed for this image, and that it was created in 1933. I am trying to find the year of his death, but there are works still attributed to him as late as 1937, so I don't believe you can call that image PD. --M ASEM (t) 15:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have replied on my talk page, so you know. J Milburn (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, looking at the discussion on Delta's talk page, I think you need to brush up on the NFCC a little, you seem to be somewhat out of touch with policy/practice. J Milburn (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Platypus
Hey, your opinion is requested at the talk page of the platypus article, to finally put this stupid capitalisation debate to rest. Cheers! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

DNA Plant Technology
Hi, I embedded some of your old research in the DNA Plant Technology page which I have been trying to expand. I hope that is okay. Infoeco (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of 'Harbottle and Lewis" talk page
You appear to have deleted this page. I would like to know why this is, and if it is possible to re-create this. The reason given appears to be that there is no page to which it refers. This is not the case, and this law firm now appears to be playing a major role in the News Corporation phone hacking scandal, so the article is an important topical one, and a talk page is surely important. Thanks Epzcaw (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Little Wormwood Scrubs


A tag has been placed on Little Wormwood Scrubs, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Edue<b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 19:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Accurist Page
Hi there,

I noticed we are both editing the Accurist page. Whilst I have lots of information and knowledge about the Accurist history and other details, I am rather new to Wikipedia.

I appreciate your contribution. I propose to add the content first and then allow you to review it and let me know what you think, or help with minor edits, such as link changes.

Thank you,

Harry Harryapostol (talk) 12:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harryapostol (talk • contribs) 10:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Accurist Page (HELP)
Hi Fish and Karate! I have more or less finished editing the Accurist Watches page.

If you could,please, have a look at it and let me know what you think.

I found it a bit difficult to place the photos in the center and I'm not sure if the way I've done it is 100% correct.

Many thanks,

Harryapostol (talk) 11:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Move and semi protected
Template:Move and semi protected has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Evil IP address (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Football world cup listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Football world cup. Since you had some involvement with the Football world cup redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Thryduulf (talk)

sockpuppet editing
There is an open WP:SPI case looking at sockpuppet editing primarily on the Johann Hari/ Talk page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed. Yonmei (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Virtual Path Identifier
I'll check that out later. I believe that some admin work was needed to do the move/merge. Vegaswikian (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Napoleonic Code
Thank you so much, Neil, for resolving my RM on "Napoleonic c/Code". --Wikiain (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 10:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Yoghurt
You declared, "To be parfaitly honest, there are strong arguments in favour of both" Strong arguments in favour of both? Honest? Really? Can you expound on this astounding claim, please, especially in light of the fact that the proponents of yogurt listed thirteen points in favour of the move, including "Once the article is moved to Yogurt, there will be no legitimate justification for moving it back to Yoghurt, and so these requests to move the article will finally end", while the yoghurt contingent could only muster up two, and one of them was the pathetically weak, "The article is currently entitled Yoghurt". Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't care where the article sits; I just closed the requested move discussion as an uninvolved administrator, and tried to judge where the consensus, rooted in policy, lay. And yes, there were strong arguments in favour of both article titles; whoever assembled the "arguments supporting "Yogurt" as a preferred spelling" just didn't really try very hard in assembling the "yoghurt contingent" arguments, only those of Team Yogurt. The arguments in favour of retaining the article at "Yoghurt" were in the comments made by the 11 people who opposed the move.  <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate  09:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: your closing statement. You, sir, win an internet. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm glad someone appreciated it. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 09:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * If you put half the effort that you put into this clever wording into really explaining your decision, instead of claiming that both sides had strong arguments without substantiating that claim, even when asked to do so, more might have appreciated the clever wording, starting with me. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Fish, I'm assuming you are aware of Requests for mediation/Yoghurt, but I couldn't find anywhere were you had been told or anything, so here you go, if you are interested. ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 04:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope, hadn't a clue. Thanks for letting me know, Erik. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 05:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to ask that you reopen the discussion and allow another administrator to close the discussion. I believe that you seriously underestimated the impact of the first name used for the article. Clearly a no consensus says that the name the article was at, yogurt, should be the name it winds up at. Your decision supports a move that clearly lacks consensus. Leaving it at the wrong name based on WP:ENGVAR is OK for a lock in a move war but not in a WP:RM discussion. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * But the article was at "Yoghurt" when the RM discussion was started. Not yogurt. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 19:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think VW is referring to the fact that the article started out at Yogurt. ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 19:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I raised the WP:ENGVAR issue in the "Reasons to move". I was coming here to politely ask you to do what Vegaswikian already did, which I'm glad to see. I would have included you in the RfM, but it was an oversight on my part (I just plain didn't think to, since you weren't a voting party). I realize now that it was probably even more proper to contact you first before doing anything, I apologize for not doing so. -Kai445 (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That may be, but this was pointed out in the discussion as to why leaving it where it was was going to be a problem. If there was no consensus, a position that other are questioning with reasonable facts, this should have been moved to Yogurt since that was where the article was before it was moved creating this mess. The fact that you did not see that in the discussions, calls your judgement into question since that was a key part of the support for the move. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Gosh, people get cross when they don't get their own way. I am very sorry that a discussion was closed in a way other then how you voted. Clearly this shows that there is something wrong with the closer, everyone else who voted, and the Internet in general. I was strongly inclined to just drop it, undo my close and let someone else deal with the hassle that would have come their way no matter what the closing result had been; I really don't care whether the article has a H in its title or not - for all I care, it could be called Yoghhhhhhhurt - but this hectoring and forum shopping is both rude and childish, and I don't want to further foster the attitude around here that constant and repetitive complaining, and passive-aggressive querying of competence, is a valid tactic that one can use to intimidate admins into backing down. If the next admin closed it in the same way I am sure this low-level and tendentious would be applied on him/her, too. I believe "no consensus" was a reasonable and appropriate call on that close. If you disagree then, frankly, tough. I do not believe in rewarding bad behaviour, if for nothing else then to protect my fellow admins; I will point out that this RM had needed closing for over a week, and the reason why is that very few admins are willing to deal with the flak of closing contested move discussions. I can't think why(!) <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 04:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you considered that a more well thought out explanation of your actions might have generated less friction? -Kai445 (talk) 04:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Besides not reading the comments in the discussion, you have apparently also did not read WP:AGF. The close was bad, plain and simple.  You are not able to support the close with facts from the discussion, if fact you admit to missing key points!  Closing as no consensus, and failing to explain why there was no consensus to return the article to the name it had before a bad move is simply unforgivable.  Accusing good intentioned editors of bad behavior is simply an appalling comment.  I think your response shows that you should have not closed that discussion and again request that you reopen it and let someone look at this.  This is not to reward anyone for anything.  It is simply to do the right thing. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

It's been several days now, the question about what are the strong oppose arguments to which you referred in your closing remain unanswered, requests that you re-open remain ignored, and concerns are multiplying at Talk:Yoghurt. I am therefore reminding you of WP:ADMINACCT:

Ignoring editors and admins like who question your actions is probably not a smart move. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have already responded to this and your repeated nagging because I didn't close a discussion the way you demanded it be closed is not going to either upset me or make me change my mind. I have re-read the RM discussion and remain satisfied that closing it as no consensus was reasonable. I notice that the majority of editors commenting on the RfC (linked above) are in agreement with this. I accept and understand that you believe those who argued to oppose the move have no worth in their arguments, however I believe they did have value. A majority of contributors were opposed to the move, people citing the fact that the article has been stable at Yoghurt for over 8 years, and WP:ENGVAR. To me, that alone was sufficient for a "no consensus" close. It is not for me to determine whose interpretation of guidelines and naming conventions is "correct" - if I am to do that then why even bother with a discussion? And note I closed it as "No consensus" NOT "Oppose move" - I would expect to always see a strong consensus in favour one way or another to close a discussion definitively. A strong consensus WAS NOT THERE. A close of "No consensus" is not a final sentence condemning the article to remain at that name for all eternity. Give it a few months and start another discussion. Or start one right now. I really really really don't care what you do. This one was closed as "no consensus" because, get this, there was "no consensus". I will not let your repeated complaining - and now passive-aggressive threats - to bully me into changing this. And I include Vegaswikian in this, not just Born2cycle. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate  06:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * THANK YOU for finally responding to the multiple calls for you to justify your decision. I note that it's been over a week since I asked you expound on your claim that the oppose side had strong arguments too.  Better late than never... You mention the citations of the fact that the article has been stable at Yoghurt for over 8 years, and WP:ENGVAR.  I presume these are the strong oppose arguments to which you referred in your closing statement, and upon which the "no consensus" decision was predicated, since you say "that alone was sufficient for a "no consensus" close".  The first of these two - that the article has been "stable" at Yoghurt for 8 years - is laughable.  The article was created as Yogurt on December 10, 2002 and there it remained, in true stability for a full year, until it was surreptitiously moved to Yoghurt on Christmas Day, 2003 in direct violation against such changes per guidance at WP:MOS, on the blatantly dubious grounds that "yoghurt" is "more phonetically correct" than "yogurt", an argument subtly mentioned on the talk page a month prior to that move .  Within a few months the move was challenged  and the history of this article is replete with challenges, moves, move reverts, eight formal RM proposal/discussions, and countless objections to the spelling.  If this qualifies as "stable", what on Earth does unstable look like?  If this is not the epitome of an unstable title, then there is no such thing as an unstable title in Wikipedia, and the opposing claim that this title is "stable" is moot.  In any case, the argument that this title is stable cannot be taken seriously, and certainly cannot be seen as a strong argument in favor of any position.  And to characterize the ENGVAR point as a strong oppose argument is to completely dismiss the support side's ENGVAR counter-argument regarding WP:RETAIN, which is part of ENGVAR, and clearly calls for returning the article to the variety of English of the original contributor in disputes exactly like this.  To consider the citation of ENGVAR as a strong oppose argument is as ridiculous as would be considering the citation of COMMONNAME a strong argument in favor of a contrived title which is not used in any sources.  You seem to try to skirt responsibility here by saying it is not for you "to determine whose interpretation of guidelines and naming conventions is 'correct'".  Oh, so participants in RM discussions can interpret policy and guidelines any way they want, and the closing admin has no duty to check on the veracity of their arguments?  What are you saying?  What indeed is the point of these discussions, then?  Since counting !votes is not how we determine consensus, just because there are considerable !votes on both sides does not mean there is no consensus.  The only way to determine consensus is to seriously consider and evaluate the arguments presented on both sides, and determine how well each one is grounded in the broad consensus at WP, largely as it is reflected in policy and guidelines.  It's clear you did not do that in this case, and that's especially disappointing, because in a conflict that has been going on for as long as this one has, it, and everyone involved with it over the years, really deserves a lot more serious consideration than you obviously gave it. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for your constructive advice which I have followed. Paul venter (talk) 05:53, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Userpage colors
I thought you had some awesome colors on your userpage, so I integrated them into my page (and credited you, ofc). --Philosopher Let us reason together. 14:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You're clearly a chap or chapette of exquisite taste. :) <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 21:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Move page to yogurt
Hi Neil. It has been a long time. Fish and karate? Please see Talk:Yoghurt. Your reading of consensus was good, of course, but your reading of policy was slightly mistaken. It is causing incredible grief. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it has been causing incredible whining. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 07:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sayre's law. On extensive analysis, many conclude that this little decision should have fallen the other way.  A wrong decision precisely defined that won't be overturned becomes an egregious offense that tears at the soul.  I take come comfort that the whining is not more vicious and more bitter.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI see my premature close on a technical point of the lates RM request Move page to yogurt -- PBS (talk) 08:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I just found this. Maybe you can chime in on why F&K would care to see you acting improperly? I'm interested to know. -Kai445 (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
—Tom Morris (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Handhandhand.JPG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Handhandhand.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Would you mind...?
Since User:Maunus was the admin I had been going to concerning article issues and has indicated he no longer wants to be of help (after leaving such a wonderful message on my talk page), would you mind taking a look at the talk page for the Natalie Wood article, specifically the section titled "Quaaludes"? My concern is content added to the article that is completely unrelated to the article and section in which it is included. The editor who added it refuses to take it out and began edit warring over it last night. I won't say anymore and allow you to make your own judgement/come to your own conclusion. If you could take a look and comment (no matter if the comments support my view of this or not), I'd appreciate it. Lhb1239 (talk) 18:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Permission for File:Chip pan fire demo.jpg
Hallo Fish and karate, do you still find the email for File:Chip pan fire demo.jpg somewhere? Could you please forward it to OTRS? Thanks! Cheers --Saibo ( Δ ) 17:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No I don't, it was 5 years ago. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 20:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hehe, yes, I know - but you wrote "please contact me if you feel a burning need to confirm this status." ;-) Could have been. Okay, anyway: In case you remember, or can interpret your text on the file page better than I: it was not just a "yes you can use on Wikipedia"-style release, right? I will transfer it to Commons then.
 * Nice to see that you are still active at Wikipedia - long time. :-) Cheers --Saibo ( Δ ) 03:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It was not just that; it was "freely and unreservedly released". <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 11:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help! :-) I made the name a bit more specific in course of the transfer (created a redir on Commons for the old name, since it is still in use on your /images page), you can delete the local file. Cheers --Saibo ( Δ ) 17:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Fish and karate,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chlopeck (talk • contribs) 23:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Star Sisterz for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Star Sisterz is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Star Sisterz until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Secret account 06:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Basilbrush.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Basilbrush.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Photo usage
Hi, I've been working on a small game built around animal quizzes and I wanted to let you know I've used one of your pictures.

I found your picture here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rhea_side_profile.jpg

And I attributed the picture like this: Neil with this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neil and also added a link to the license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I hope you're happy with it, please let me know if this is not the case. You can find the game here: http://apps.facebook.com/animalalbum Or through here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/AnimalAlbum/156339584490672

Kind regards, Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 15:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for taking the picture and making it available.

Articles for deletion/Grant Street
Would you please userfy a copy of Grant Street to my namespace? User:GrapedApe/Grant Street would be find. After this article, I think I can make a good case for a standalone article?--GrapedApe (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of What's Inside Heidi's Head?


The article What's Inside Heidi's Head? has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article contains no sources and is only a few sentences long. It would be better off being merged.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Astros4477 ( talk ) 15:23, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Flat Out, Flat Broke: Formula 1 the Hard Way! for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flat Out, Flat Broke: Formula 1 the Hard Way! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flat Out, Flat Broke: Formula 1 the Hard Way! until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 18:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jamaican posse


The article Jamaican posse has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Insufficient references; specifically regarding the people and organisations it refers to. Basically it just reads like it wants to be a good story.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Basket Feudalist 12:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Photo from Auschwitz
Hi, probably you would like to comment on --Joerg 130 (talk) 16:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details
Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as: are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Pogliaghi.jpg
 * File:What is this place.PNG

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 04:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Would like to create page 'Tamarack (Band)'. Will it be deleted again?
Hi. I was surprised that there was no page for the Tamarack (band). It seems there was once a page, but it's gone now. You are listed as having deleted the page in 2007. There was another in 2008 as well, but it seems User:Accounting4Taste who's left the collective deleted that one.

If I recreate the page, what are the chances of it being shot down again? I feel it is a significant band with 8 albums to their credit, and a solid reputation among the folk community in Canada. While not very active these days, the principals are still around so we could still see more from them. I'm willing to do some research and put together a substantive page.

Thanks. SheamusPatt (talk) 02:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Buckley-jubilee-2.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Buckley-jubilee-2.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * As I uploaded a copy to Commons, I feel slightly guilty, but it is a good picture and I am hoping it might get to stay, unless you have a better one, with the right licence. Hogweard (talk) 18:57, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * this is why Wikipedia editors are quitting. Image was free image was taken on my phone, why delete it. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 10:50, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * wheeee look I make the edit. I make the edit good. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 10:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Move and semi protected
Template:Move and semi protected has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Fish and karate possibly compromised. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

File:EDLOWFRONTPAGE.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EDLOWFRONTPAGE.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

An old edit of yours
Hi Neil, a very long time ago you made [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buckley&diff=prev&oldid=20335549 this edit] to the Buckley article, which stated (among other things) that the local high school used to be a military hospital. However, an unregistered editor has recently [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buckley&diff=595157546&oldid=583596379 made an edit contradicting that statement], so I've removed it. Do you happen to remember where you got this information from? There's also [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buckley&diff=199436106&oldid=195642716 this edit] to consider. Graham 87 07:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. Don't think I have a reference to hand for it. I'll try and find one. That other edit is rubbish. Owen went to Hawarden High. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate 06:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nigrosene


The article Nigrosene has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability. Tagged since September 2008. No sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~KvnG 23:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia addiction listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia addiction. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia addiction redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Huang (talk in public in private &#124; contribs) 08:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

List of colloquialisms listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of colloquialisms. Since you had some involvement with the List of colloquialisms redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Cnilep (talk) 03:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Nitin Gupta (Scientist)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nitin Gupta (Scientist). 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. Rahul6301 (talk) 04:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Next meetups in North England
Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in: If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!
 * Leeds on 12th April 2015
 * Manchester on 26th April 2015
 * Liverpool on 24th May 2015

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Rise of Modern Simulation


The article The Rise of Modern Simulation has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * An independent release by a band. Fails notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request of your image gallary
Hi! For you or any other administrator: please relink File:Auschwitz 2.JPG to File:Auschwitz concentration camp July 2006.JPG at User:Fish and karate/images. The image was moved so that it would stop shadowing a different Commons file with the same name (commons:File:Auschwitz 2.JPG). The redirect page needs to be blanked or deleted so that it will start showing the Commons image under that name, but this usage of the old file name is holding that up. Cheers, Nick&#8288;—&#8288;Contact/Contribs 04:44, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Graham 87 06:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Harvest Mission Community Church listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Harvest Mission Community Church. Since you had some involvement with the Harvest Mission Community Church redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 19:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Tun Mahathir listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tun Mahathir. Since you had some involvement with the Tun Mahathir redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 05:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Question on page moves
Hello, I'm the one who instigated the move for Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. My question was about the process and protocol for how these are executed. As I couldn't do the move itself, the old redirect page had to tagged for Speedy Deletion. I checked on it for a few days and it was still tagged and still there. Curious about it again, I couldn't find any history of my edits related to this task anywhere in my contributions! I had made a few edits to both pages, to the talk pages, to the backdoor side where I had made my request. There was a solid block of contributions where I could Ctrl+F for any of these keywords and check up on the status. I spend more time than I care to admit searching for this information until I was able to fully backtrack my steps and find that the article had finally been moved. My question for you is why is there zero evidence of any of my edits or anything in my history related to this move? And why is it the protocol that the instigating editor gets no notification that their request was finally looked into? Seems like an oversight in the system and a weird obfuscation of the mechanics. JesseRafe (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad/images listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Muhammad/images. Since you had some involvement with the Muhammad/images redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Traditionalist (talk) 13:27, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Ziyankhan1
Heads up that this user is a sockpuppet who's thing seems to be inappropriate speedying, possibly a reaction to having an article deleted once. I reported them to AIV a short while ago. --McGeddon (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. Thanks to you sir or madam.  <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate  10:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Kindly Review: G-Worldwide Entertainment
The article passed WP:AUD and WP:GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bello96 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)‎