User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad/Archive 5

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! I actually took a lot of inspiration from the lowercase sigmabot III page, as well as Fut.Perf's. GABHello! 20:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem! --Ches (talk) 20:08, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear you felt your RfA didn't go too well. I wish you the best of luck for the future, and any other future nominations. --Ches (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and good luck. GABHello! 23:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

My RfA question
Personally, I would have immediately blocked "MelanieC" per WP:IMPERSONATE (Melanie C), and I would have warned "RoyalJordanian" per WP:CORPNAME and WP:ISU (Royal Jordanian). Admittedly my question was tricky, and your answer already exceeded my expectations. Good luck with your RfA. It is tough for any candidate. sst✈ 05:10, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm firmly of the belief that you should get the adminship, and that the opposes on the nature of "too soon" are completely ridiculous. The RFA Process is a stressful week for any candidate, I just want you to know that win or lose you still have many allies here. Good luck, and try not to stress yourself out too much! &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 06:21, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi GeneralizationsAreBad. On my preliminary vote rationale in neutral, it's up to you whether you wish to give it a shot or not. If you do, you can choose how you go about it. For example, if you think you have addressed some of the matters by/upon answering certain questions in your RfA, you can just refer to the specific Q&A numbers. Alternatively, if you think you can address it in a direct reply, you can do it either in reply to the oppose vote or even to mine. Or you might even use a combination of both, or something else altogether. Whatever way you choose, all I ask is that you ping me to let me know if/when you think you have made an effort to address it. Cheers, Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * * Thank you; I will make sure to respond later today, as well as answer some of the other questions that others have asked. GABHello! 16:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC) Regretfully, I have withdrawn my RFA nomination for a variety of reasons. Thank you anyways for your participation. GABHello! 17:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear that, but no worries; I look forward to your next one presuming you give it another shot with time - I certainly think you should. :) Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

RFA
Following the advice I have received from others, I have withdrawn my nomination for RFA. I would, however, like to give a very grateful thanks to all those who kindly voiced their support -- I truly appreciate it. As for those !voting oppose, I give my assurance that I aim to improve in these areas, regardless of whether or not I consider an RFA in the far future. Thank you for your suggestions and concerns.

All the best,

GABHello! 17:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, GAB. I'm sorry to see you withdraw your nomination but the Opposes seem to focus on the fact that your account is about a year old and you didn't have experience in certain areas of the project that they believe are essential. This is criticism that can be easily addressed, rather than criticism of ones past or of ones character. I hope you will work on building up more experience and consider a second RfA in 6-12 months. My 2 cents. Liz  Read! Talk! 17:21, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I think a major factor was the simple truth that I have been highly focused in a few areas (SPI, AIV, UAA, CSD), and while I may have been effective in them, diversified interests seem to be the name of the game (although I have seen some exceptions to this). More content is a must, so I should resume my long-delayed GA improvement of Operation Infinite Reach and Hunger Plan to begin with. More AFDs are critical, too. Best, GABHello! 17:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * GAB. I was sorry to see that you withdrew the nomination before I had a chance to comment. I was going to land in "neutral", regretfully, but here is what I was going to say: I have often seen you around Wikipedia, particularly at WP:RFPP, and I always found your nominations on target and your comments helpful and insightful. I very much believe that you have the right temperament and the right skill set to be an administrator. The only thing that made me say "neutral" instead of "support" is that I want someone to demonstrate an understanding of article deletion criteria before I am willing to hand them the deletion tools. That experience is demonstrated by a CSD log, a PROD log, and a record of commenting at AfD. A lot of people encouraged you to get more edits, create a few articles, be here longer, etc.; those are not my issues. What I want is to see you establish a track record in the deletion areas. Set up Twinkle to log your CSD and PROD nominations. Then spend a little time doing new page review, where you will find some articles that qualify for speedy deletion or proposed deletion or AfD. If you don't like doing new page review (I never liked it), then search the stub categories, or the "articles lacking sources" categories, or other places where articles may lurk that shouldn't be here. Tag them as you think appropriate, and follow up to see how your nominations fare; that's how you learn. Also, start commenting at AfD - maybe seeking out nominations in areas you are interested in, using the delsort tags, for example politics or military or wherever you live. Make sure that your comments at AfD are thoughtful and display an understanding of deletion policy. (Some people try to run up their AfD count by piling-on in discussions where the outcome is already obvious. Word to the wise: don't do that.) Do this for maybe three months; by then you will have compiled enough of a record to satisfy me and most people. Good luck and I look forward to supporting your next RfA. --MelanieN (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Why did you withdraw? Were you just not interested in being admin? Hdjensofjfnen ( U T  C ) Vote for GAB for admin! 20:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I withdrew for a number of reasons:
 * Some participants were beginning to swing from "neutral" or "support" to "oppose." Having seen previous RFAs play out, this is not a reassuring sign.
 * There were legitimate concerns that needed to be addressed, such as participation in other content areas on Wikipedia.
 * The overall trend of support was way down, and I didn't see an imminent wave of !voters to swing the tide.
 * Thank you for your support, whatever the outcome was. I will see how things look a year from now, once I've accumulated further experience. GABHello! 20:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That much is true, sadly. At the time of withdrawal, there were 15 more opposers than on midnight UTC on March 2. And it need not be one year — I believe that six months will do the trick. And I need to fix my signature ... lol. Hdjensofjfnen ( U T  C ) Why did GAB withdraw? 23:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, time is not really the issue here so much as experience. Even if I waited another year and basically kept editing in the same areas, I kind of doubt the result would be too much different. GABHello! 23:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi GAB, I felt discouraged during my first run for admin, which I failed, and I felt discouraged during my second run for admin which I passed. Don't sweat it. Most of the people who voted against you probably don't know anything about the stuff you've done, but as you edit more and more, you'll no doubt encounter more people upon whom you'll have a positive impact. That's how it goes! But please continue your hard work, keep up the strong communication, edit lots more, keep up all the good stuff you do!  Also, don't be confused by the temptation of "admin". It's not a promotion. It's not a badge of honor. To me, it's a position of trust. To many others, however, it's a promotion, it's a badge of honor... The reality is that you'll be so swamped with the mop, you'll never get a chance to enjoy it. True story!  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi GAB, if you're interested in nominating for an admin role in the future, serving as one of the Military History Project's coordinators is a way of preparing for and demonstrating suitability for the role. The coordinators do a number of admin-like tasks, and being elected helps to demonstrate that you have the community's trust in relevant roles. The nomination process and election takes place in August and September. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I hope to get back into the swing of more content editing soon, starting with some old projects I've delayed. GABHello! 23:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Good effort

 * Thank you :) I am actually rather glad that those in opposition suggested areas of improvement, so it's genuinely constructive criticism. GABHello! 17:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd like to echo General Ization's comment: you made a good shot at it and you should get it next time. May I offer a little advice about your reply to Ritchie333's additional question 10? Before you take any action (admin or not), unless it's an obviously disruptive edit, always quickly gather as much evidence as you can from the article history, user edit histories, etc. For instance, in Ritchie's hypothetical example you should check if the IP (or similar IPs) had recently made the same edits to the article (or similar articles). Consider the external links that were removed: might they be valid or are they clearly junk? Were they added by the 50k editor, and has that editor already been given advice/warnings/blocks for relevant behaviour? Or has 50k been reverting a spate of vandalism and just got a little tetchy? and so on. The action to take should be based on what you learn during this quick evidence gathering phase. Action that accurately targets the issue has the power to resolve conflicts swiftly, whereas generic action – especially from an admin, like you proposed in your answer – can make things worse. I think you know this already, but I hope it helps anyway :) —S MALL  JIM   22:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, my question-answering skills were a bit sub-par, I concede that readily. GABHello! 23:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

 * I appreciate your support in this. GABHello! 23:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Will do, for sure. GABHello! 23:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Hopefully, I won't need to rely on sheer luck next time! :) GABHello! 20:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Sorry to see your RfA didn't go as planned. Rest assured I believe you will make for an outstanding admin in the future.

RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC) 
 * Thank you -- I hope so. GABHello! 23:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Raw deal
Sorry your RfA didn't go over well. I think you should just wait a few months more before submitting another one; remember, the only big reason people opposed is due to a lack of experience. Once you're sufficiently tenured by the standards of 2016, I'm sure you'll pass easily. Kurtis (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. It's alright; I can easily understand the concerns raised. I will be waiting at least another year, then I will decide whether or not to try again. In the meanwhile, I will definitely be working in the areas brought up. GABHello! 20:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well whenever you decide to run again, drop me a line... I'll gladly be another co-nom. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 21:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the offer. I'll take you up on it, but can't give a precise date. GABHello! 21:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Crazy standards these days! When I was new, 2000-3000 edits, not continually causing drama, and a couple months was plenty. I'm sorry to see you didn't pass this time, I'm sure you'll take what you've learned from this one and ace the next one! SQL Query me!  22:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I shall return. :) GABHello! 23:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

GAB, I was waiting for a full reply to the other questions before making up my mind which way to vote, but thanks for answering my North Korean prisons dispute question. There's never a "right answer" to these questions, it's always interesting to see how people cope with awkward situations and defuse them. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * GAB, keep your chin up. Lots of people have had their turn at RfA :) I'll see you around. — Brianhe (talk) 12:42, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I think you would have done just fine had you been granted the tools this time around. But I respect your decision to wait a year. Kurtis (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. GABHello! 19:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * August is certainly optimistic, but we'll see... my workload fluctuates considerably. GABHello! 23:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey man!
Thanks for the thanks for the anti-vandal on the Catholic Sex abuse page. Winterysteppe (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , thanks for your thanks for my thanks... GABHello! 02:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

RfA
I didn't see your RfA until it was already closed, but I thought I would just let you have my opinion anyway. You are a good and conscientious editor, and I can believe you will make a good administrator. I also thought that many of your answers to questions at the RfA were excellent. The main reason for opposition was that it was too soon, so please do come back to RfA again when you have more experience. How much more? Impossible to give an exact figure, but I would suggest waiting at least another year. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk)
 * Thank you for the kind words. I don't think time matters as much as the need for more experience, but I think about a year (plus, of course, all of the necessary work in AFD, etc.) should suffice. GABHello! 15:48, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't comment at your RfA but I've been editing since April 2015 and I would not feel ready to be an admin. Yew have made significantly fewer edits in all contexts than me. However, my main concern was that you were nominated by, and accepted a nomination from, an openly fascist and neo-Nazi editor. That was an error of judgement. AusLondonder (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hacking
Please let my article stay I just want it to stay someone got rid of my last article please be civil and leave my article alone IKnowAlotOfStuff1204 (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. GABHello! 21:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Please don't let my article be deleted search hacking in Wikipedia there is other stuff like this please let my page stay IKnowAlotOfStuff1204 (talk) 21:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Replying (again) on your talk page. GABHello! 21:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Please do not remove my article if you do I will be forced to edit and report your articles I found things wrong about it stuff that actually didn't happen your choice IKnowAlotOfStuff1204 (talk) 22:04, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You'll be "forced" to do what now? -- samtar talk or stalk 22:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)tps


 * Retaliation and threats are not appropriate for Wikipedia. As a non-admin (heh), I do not have the power to actually delete articles. GABHello! 22:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh I'm not threatening you I'm just telling you I love history I have studied hundreds of books on the Korean War and World War Two and I found a lot of things in your articles that didn't actually happen and as a member of Wikipedia I will be forced to report them IKnowAlotOfStuff1204 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I know u don't have the power to delete them but u have the power to report them take back your report or I will have to report your articles IKnowAlotOfStuff1204 (talk) 22:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear I've found a fellow history bookworm, but threatening to "report" articles in retribution is not so good. Please stop, as threats such as those are not tolerated on Wikipedia, and may well lead to a block. GABHello! 22:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thank you very much for the drink. I'll perhaps try again within a year-and-a-half or so, having learned the lessons of this one. GABHello! 01:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :), Thanks for the email - Without going in to too much detail it was probably for the best but hey hopefully you'll have better luck next time (Sorry nothing personal but I don't reply to anyone as privacy etc but thanks for emailing anyway!), Happy editing and enjoy the Beer! :) – Davey 2010 Talk 02:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Gauri Gill
Hello, You nominated my page on photographer Gauri Gill for speedy deletion. I am a new editor but I did read the guidelines and believe that the post and citations are within the guidelines. Gill is an important photographer that documents and explores feminist issues in Indian society. I have sources from NYTimes and books. I am interested in adding more women into wikipedia. Please don't erase this important female artist from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauri_Gill

21:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC)21:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etrogorchard (talk • contribs)
 * OK, thank you for letting me know. You may want to take a look at the notability guidelines to ensure any future pages are kept. Also, please do not remove speedy deletion templates, and you might want to provide page numbers for the book references you cite in the article. Thanks, GABHello! 21:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I looked at the notability guidelines and thought the subject fit. I felt the artist has received significant coverage from reliable sources (NY Times, books, Canadian newspapers. ) Her work has addressed, among many things,  violence against women and minority groups in India - both topics important and under represented. I linked to particular events. I find the work remarkable and worthy of notice as outlined in the notability. She has received a significant award in her field and has made a widely recognized contribution in her field. I've added page numbers to the books, added a few more reliable sources and removed some. Let me know what you think of the notations. Etrogorchard (talk) 23:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the article looks better now, thank you for communicating and taking the time to look at the links. Your content additions elsewhere look good, too. GABHello! 23:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thank you. Your question in particular was very polite and helpful, and it opened my eyes to another area of this site where I really need to gain experience. As for content creation, I can certainly work on that too. I wish you the best of luck as well, in case you ever consider trying again. GABHello! 15:48, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course, GAB! I thought that, instead of piling on an Oppose vote and jumping to conclusions, I'd at least ask you about your AFD participation. Who knows, maybe you had a good reason for it. I appreciate your wishes as well. If I do run again, it'll probably be in September so that one year has gone by since my first RFA. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:56, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Britt bass
Hi GeneralizationsAreBad, I have removed the CSD template on the above article. It is a work in progress and is being monitored by a group here at Georgia State University as part of ArtAndFeminism edit-a-thon. — Ganeshk  ( talk ) 21:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem, sorry for the trouble. Isn't there a special article tag made for the purpose of alerting others of this? GABHello! 21:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's already there. Thanks for letting me know! GABHello! 21:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding. — Ganeshk  ( talk ) 21:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Recent Reverted Edit
I recently reverted an Edit from you Here as Vandalism, which I incorrectly put your name as. DrkBlueXG (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries. Thanks for letting me know. GABHello! 22:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Крамонд (стоянка)
It was my mistake, sorry. I agree with deleation of article "Крамонд (стоянка)" from en.wikipedia.VSL56 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for letting me know. GABHello! 21:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Ojasweb
Just looking over the article after returning (yay me!), is it G11 material or does it just need improving? T F { Contribs } { Edit Quest! } 16:07, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it is probably G11 ("the company is set to provide solutions to the digital marketing challenges in Badagry and its environment... The founder Oluwole Ojajuni who is also a Biochemist is a certified digital marketer with vast knowledge of internet marketing. Since 2012, he has worked extensively as a web developer, web content writer, blogger, researcher, search engine optimizer, web analyst, Facebook and Google ads manager, and internet marketing consultant... Services Website development and maintenance. Online advertising. Competition research and website analysis. Lead generation. Social medial management and profile optimization. Email marketing. Domain name registration and hosting. Search engine optimization. Graphics design, Consulting, etc"). But by all means, if you feel otherwise, please remove the CSD tag. GABHello! 16:08, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's been deleted, anyhow. GABHello! 16:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Mandhir Singh

 * Thanks for contacting me on my talk page. You may want to take a look at our general notability guidelines, which require substantive, independent coverage of a subject in order to justify an article. As it stands, most of the article's sourcing came from press releases and links affiliated with the subject (i.e., not independent), and I didn't find that any of them included the sort of in-depth coverage of the subject that Wikipedia strives for in its articles. Please feel free to make your case for inclusion on the AFD page, which you can find in the AFD tag at the top of the article. Thanks, GABHello! 23:04, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

hey ???

 * You may want to consider reading Wikipedia's advice for new editors on creating articles. I think you might find that helpful in assisting you with future content creation. Thanks for the shiny things, too :) Cheers, GABHello! 23:17, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtxB3mYt5XU&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAgy2crZqZ8&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDDZm3wNlP4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3_CiqfINzk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21AjSRjr4oQ&feature=youtu.be

check these links for your surety bro.. the person is genuine you have mistaken... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeet456 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

are you there bro ????

Jeet456 (talk) 23:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Please submit your comments here, not on the nominator's Talk page.  General Ization  Talk   23:40, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm here, although I am going to turn off for the night in just a bit. I am looking through the videos, and while I appreciate your providing me with these, I think you may want to see the guidelines for entertainers. According to this guideline, musicians should meet one of these criteria:
 * Have had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
 * Have a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
 * Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
 * I recommend you also look at the guidelines for musicians' biographies. Thanks, GABHello! 23:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

he has a hug fan base bro... now please cancel that request as you can see that this person is genuine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeet456 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * A really key part of Wikipedia is verifiability -- in other words, providing reliable sources to prove what we write in articles. That is why it might seem like we're all so focused on proper sourcing, especially since Wikipedia has really strict rules regarding biographies of living people. Please comment on the AFD page (kindly linked above by General Ization) in the future, so others can see your comments. Thank you, GABHello! 23:49, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Adminship?
Have you considered it? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * (watching:) just survived RfA, look above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. Still, that's actually quite an encouraging first RfA, considering. I'd encourage you to consider running again in a few months. If you nudge me and I like your contribs, I'd be happy to nominate. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you both very much. I appreciate your offer greatly, and I was thinking of running in perhaps a year or so (just to be more prepared, as I am a cautious type.) If you believe that I may be able to resolve the issues brought up in the RFA (lack of AFD and content experience) sooner than that and satisfy the common oppose rationale of "too soon" (which was indeed brought up), I would consider running sooner. Out of curiosity, where might I have run into you before here, if you don't mind my asking? Thanks, GABHello! 14:46, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure you have run into me before. I spotted your request for page protection and thought that actually you'd be best off having the tools yourself. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited September 11 attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Justice Department. 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) 10:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Paula Brooks (politician)
Would you be willing to do me a personal favor and help me keep an eye on this article? I added some content this morning concerning Mrs. Brooks' having lost a primary election here in Columbus, Ohio last night. An IPv6 user has twice now removed part of my edit (along with its source); I suspect the IP has a political motivation, as this was a pretty ugly campaign. I've reverted the IP twice, but since I was the source of the content being removed, I don't want to edit war over it, nor appear to be trying to own the article. Another article which contains complementary content concerning the same race (on the winner in the primary) is at. Thanks! <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  Talk   22:27, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm out until the weekend, but I'll keep it in sight. If they revert again, I'll warn them. GABHello! 22:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks and a FYI for ya
Hello GAB. Thanks for your post at the SPI that I started. I wanted to let you know that Bbb23, per the note at the top of their talk page, is off wiki for two to three weeks. If you've already seen that then great but I thought I should mention it just in case. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 01:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, don't think I saw that. I just pinged because they handled the Sheds case. Thank you for letting me know. GABHello! 01:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think pinging was okay under the circumstances - especially since you knew the history of the situation. I just wanted you to know why Bbb23 may not respond to this or anything else for the next few weeks. Your knowledge and work in dealing with these drawers of smelly socks - I always visualize the way Michael Palin says filthy and smelly when referring to these :-) - is much appreciated MarnetteD&#124;Talk 02:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omen_V:_The_Abomination&action=history
regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omen_V:_The_Abomination&action=history

I have done a bit of work on this article, would you consider removing the deletion tag now? I'm not sure if I should do it myself or who to contact regarding this.cheersPanglossx (talk) 11:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Bad humo(u)r
Thank you for a hearty giggle (can giggles be hearty? Maybe it was more of a guffaw.) Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 15:38, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I try my best. I know how frustrating this harassment must be (I've been through a good deal myself), so you have my empathy. GABHello! 17:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Clarity Through CU
As per this SPI, it seems that ItsLassieTime may be parroting a number of other LTAs. So this might make matters interesting, especially in regards to that combined Starship9000/CCCC/Sheds connection that I proposed (they are probably just imitating one another's behavior). GABHello! 22:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info GAB. Oh joy. I do appreciate the vigilance provided by both of you in dealing with these. Best regards. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for bothering you, I know this isn't a fun area to work in. GABHello! 22:34, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No bother at all. In fact I do want you to keep me up to date on what you find as this continues. It is very helpful. My "oh joy" statement wasn't directed at you - just the situation where we are getting "meat" with our "socks" now :-( Many apologies for the confusion. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

China Oceanwide Holdings deletion
I had contested speedy deletion and now it is deleted. Can you offer any explanation why? And by who, was it you? I want to go on record and state that I feel this was a mistake to delete when it was actively being enhanced and contested. --Wikipietime (talk) 23:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * First off, I understand how frustrating it must be to have your work deleted, and I am sorry for that. I didn't delete the article myself, as I am not an admin. The reason I requested deletion was under WP:A7, since I did not believe the article credibly showed how the company in question was notable. I encourage you to consider rewriting the article with some independent sources establishing notability for the company; you could also try your hand at writing an article on another subject. The admin who deleted the article is, so you may want to speak with them about this, too. Once more, sorry for any stress resulting from this. Best, GABHello! 01:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for explanation. I am yet to get the rationale for deletion. The company is cited in this article Hutchison Harbour Ring and many other wikipedia articles. It would seem that brevity for an article that should have already existed would not be a reason for deleting. --Wikipietime (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I'll take another look tomorrow. I'm always willing to reconsider  DGG ( talk ) 02:01, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that
Hi GeneralizationsAreBad, thanks very much for that comment. I was hoping you felt that way and I see you have the integrity I expected. I'll be in line for that role just like yourself someday; you'll probably beat me to it. I'm still concentrating on content. Take a look at my new BLP article at Articles for deletion/Mary Lou Bruner if you're interested in weighing in; I'm still writing the article. I use automated tools all the time; they'll probably ding me for it someday too, but at least I can point to my content to balance it out. I have also worked at the GA Help desk for over a year, but I have other administrative tasks on my list to accomplish (User:Prhartcom/Adminship). Someday, when the time is right. Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia. I believe you're doing a great job; keep up the good work. Best, Prhartcom (talk) 03:10, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks to you too, that means a lot to me. I'm also currently in the middle of a pet project, Operation Infinite Reach, which needed some attention. I think that automated tools have skewed my stats dramatically, even though they've been so helpful for me. I'm trying to keep the future off my mind for now and focus on good old fashioned content. I'll look at your article tomorrow, looks colorful for sure. I would have responded even sooner, if it wasn't for this! Best, GABHello! 03:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

‎Hezbollah flag
Please don't try. As the flag is marked non-free, using it in this context would be seen as non-necessary and a failure of the fair-use criteria. Of course, this would be a reasonable use aside from the copyright issue; I wouldn't hesitate to enable its use here if it were PD-simple or PD-shape. Nyttend (talk) 23:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks anyways. GABHello! 23:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Quick Question
How was the ban on user, Antonio Bonocinis, lifted? I noticed he recently started editing music-related pages again, even though he admitted to being the tenth sockpuppet of Smoore95GAGA. Since this user has recently vandalized my created pages several times, I'm a bit nervous and reluctant to seeing him back here. Sorry if I'm bothering you, I'm just voicing my concerns. Thanks. Carbrera (talk) 02:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * They were blocked for socking. GABHello! 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

SPI
Haha, that SPI troll was active on my SPI as well! (He/she found you not guilty there, you'll be pleased to hear.) Does anyone know what else this clown's been doing? It seems to have created a lot of socks and vandalised Wikipedia in quite a well-informed way, so I wonder in case I run into them again. Blythwood (talk) 03:51, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for just replying, I've been ill. I only was alerted to that nonsense (made my heart skip a beat at first, then I started laughing) by virtue of the fact that they inadvertently pinged me. It's potentially dangerous if some admin doesn't look closely at the page, though. Besides that, I really don't know anything about them, sorry. I just assumed they were a Supreme Genghis Khan sock. GABHello! 12:12, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * GAB I thought it was nice to be mentioned in such an illustrious group of editors. I hope you get to feeling better soon!! MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * One of these editors is not like the other... I'm really honored, as a matter of fact. I am just curious who the actual master is. GABHello! 18:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Great link GAB. Thanks for bringing a big smile to my Sunday :-) MarnetteD&#124;Talk 20:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, glad I could help. I pride myself on my artful choice of joke links. GABHello! 20:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Did I violate WP:Syntheis
Article in question: Batn Rabigh Caravan Raid

On above article I quoted. This primary source EXPLICITLY mentions Sa'd was the first to shoot an arrow for Islam,

The secondary sources in Batn Rabigh Caravan Raid also EXPLICITLY mentions Sa'd was the first to shoot an arrow for Islam.

I have been accused of violating WP:SYNTHESIS. What is your opinion, is this synthesis? I would like a valued third party opinion --Misconceptions2 (talk) 21:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not the best person perhaps to comment on this, since my background is not really in Islamic studies. Nevertheless, I will take a look shortly (have been away from the computer) and see what I think. GABHello! 20:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

GeneralizationsAreMobile
Hey,

Quick question. Did you create User:GeneralizationsAreMobile?

Thanks, TJH2018   talk  19:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I did, thanks for asking. I will be using that one for when I'm not at home. GABHello! 19:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, just wanted to make sure. You never know nowadays! Cheers! TJH2018   talk  19:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, could I ask you a quick favour? Can you take a look at Austin Wade Petersen? Lots of stuff going on there that I don't have the power to deal with. Thanks! TJH2018   talk  19:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yikes, thanks for letting me know. I filed an SPI case on this earlier: . Please feel free to drop by once I add everything. GABHello! 22:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey
Hi mate not sure why you've marked the article for deletion could you please explain, thank you It is relevant as its discussing the history of a company and if you compare it to this for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleetmatics what are they doing differently?

J — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jobrien874 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you for contacting me. I'm sorry for any frustration this may have caused. The reason I tagged was under Wikipedia's WP:A7 speedy deletion criteria, which states that the article in question does not indicate the importance of the organization. You may want to take a look at this. I can't speak for the other article, but deletions are generally handled with regards to the article in question, and not the non/existence of others. In any event, hope I was able to clear up any confusion a little. Best, GABHello! 23:07, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

1973 Capital City 500
Can you tell me why you did this? A4032 (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't entirely sure why some sourced content was removed from the article, so I reverted the removal. I would be curious, however, to hear your reasoning. GABHello! 17:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Like I said in the edit summary it wasn't directly about that race. Since the race happened in 1973, things that happened in 1953, 1980, 1999 and 2001 have absolutely nothing to do with the race.  The first paragraph I removed is tangentially about the race, but the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article and it is not mentioned anywhere in the article other than in the lead. The 1968 paving again is only tangentially about the race.  None of it is important to understanding the race.  A4032 (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Also if you weren't sure why it was removed, why didn't you ask instead of reverting less than a minute after I did my edit? A4032 (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You're right, and I have removed it. My apologies for the mistake; I acted too hastily there. Thank you, GABHello! 17:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. A4032 (talk) 18:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)