User talk:George Ho/Archives/2012/4

Disambiguation link notification for April 12
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Matt Sterling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to AVN


 * The Boys in the Bar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ken Levine

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Administrators Noticeboard Thread
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:42, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

RFPP
By the way, what is up with the numerous requests for page protection, anyway? Templates should be added to RFPP with lt, for one thing. Also, you'll notice that a number of the requests were turned down. Generally, templates should not be protected until absolutely necessary. It's fairly obvious when a template falls into the "high-risk" category, although there's no set number of uses which push it into that category. Anyway... just because Twinkle makes it easy to nominate everything doesn't mean that you have to make those nominations. Overloading RFPP isn't helping, either (there's some consternation about your requests on the regular Administrators' noticeboard). — V = IR (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 20:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * So how will I tell whether which page deserves protection, such as template. Template:non-free reduced and Template:oldffdfull are (semi-)protected. You can ask for unprotection if you want. --George Ho (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Generally, they get protected when they need to be protected (following disruption, or when a template is really widely used). Just glancing over some of your requests shows that you should probably read through High-risk templates. 500 transclusions is not even remotely "high risk" (at least, not when the tempalte is only used in normal articles. If it's used on the front page, or part of a dispute resolution process, that can change things significantly), and things like "Microsoft is a big name" have absolutely zero relevance to decisions about article protection. — V = IR (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 21:12, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * What can I do next time? --George Ho (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well... you could go slower (two or three at a time, at the most), and decide for yourself if the protection is actually needed. Protection is supposed to be a last resort, after all. { — V = IR (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 21:21, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * George, if you see a template being vandalised, then report it at RFPP (and make sure you use the right formatting). If it's not being vandalised, don't. A lot of admins have those templates on their watchlists anyway, and high risk templates are protected anyway. So it's not something you need to worry about yourself.Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Now, have you sorted out the problem with the page moves yet. Where is the discussion on that going on? Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * No one brought up the double redirect thing yet. --George Ho (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't do any more redirects at the moment. Lets have a Redirects 101 over on the mentorship page. You haven't quite got the hang of the technical aspect. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Reverted move
Hi, I had your move of Characters of Kingdom Hearts to List of Kingdom Hearts characters reverted because it went against consensus established at WP:SE. We consider certain pages about characters qualify as articles rather than lists because of their substantial contextual information (see Characters of Final Fantasy VIII, for example). Characters of Kingdom Hearts is a former featured article, not a list, for this very reason. In the future, I suggest you use the main WP:RM procedure for potentially controversial moves like this, instead of the technical moves section which certainly is not applicable in this case. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Where can I discuss this first? If Characters of Final Fantasy VIII is an article, not a list, then why is List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters a list? --George Ho (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * WT:SE is a good choice, if you don't think the talk page is good enough. List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters has all the qualities of a featured article, but the editors of that article decided to take it to WP:FLC, rather than WP:FAC, which is a personal choice. User:Deckiller and I felt that Characters of Final Fantasy VIII could stand up to the more stringent criteria of WP:FA? and we were right. User:Guyinblack25 and I felt the same about Characters of Kingdom Hearts and we were proved right there as well, though the article has since deteriorated and I'd like to fix it up some time soon. Personally, I feel that if a page can be made into a featured article, it should. Some pages can't be converted into articles (like List of Fullmetal Alchemist chapters) and that's fine, but if it can, I prefer to but this is just a personal preference. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters
This page is an interesting case because it doesn't have a traditional list structure. However, it does serve to list the characters in its own way (prose instead of tables), and I think it can validly be called a list. I've seen pages similar to this one at featured list candidates before, and I never thought that they were at the wrong process, if that's your concern. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, no. I have no problem about it as list; in fact, I'm impressed. However, Lemonade51 in Peer review/List of Friends characters/archive1 believes that table should be used for lists. --George Ho (talk) 22:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Different editors are always going to have different expectations for what they want to see in articles, and lists are no exception. In cases where a page is a hybrid between a list and an article, this is especially true. If you're concerned about what FLC reviewers will think of the structure, you can always ask for opinions on FLC talk. I'm sure the editors there will be able to help you decide which format is best (it can vary by article). Giants2008  ( Talk ) 01:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Marple TV series
Hi, GH. Your db fx linked OK (by redirect) to the ITV series Agatha Christie's Marple, but I thought it preferable to name the link exactly, at least for the moment. I agree that inclusion of 'ITV' in the title would be very helpful, along the lines of a move discuission I've started at Talk:Miss Marple (TV series). I hope you will contribute there, in the hope of sorting out the confusion by consensus. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I see what you've just done and will consequently revert my own edit for the meantime. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

"Mentorship" request
You request that you would replace Fastily's place as a "mentor". Dr. K says a number of mentors is sufficient. I've not been getting responses from Begoon and some others yet. Well, let's wait... shall we? --George Ho (talk) 02:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not. As a matter of fact, I specifically said I did not wish to be called that. Beyond that, I'm happy to wait to see what others suggest. - jc37 03:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge to Musicians of the Titanic
George, I saw your request at Proposed mergers. Since it was agreed that the Musicians article should exist, could you please create one (a mere tiny stub is fine for now) so that there is a place to discuss it? Then we can copy that userspace discussion over to its talk page. I don't care which article title you use for it, since that is easily changed. Let me know when you've done this, I'm watching your talk page. Thanks, D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  12:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.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. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

grammar tip
Hi there - I've seen you around WP:RM quite a bit these days, and just wanted to give you a quick English grammar tip. "Punctuation" is a mass noun, which means that you don't make it plural with an "s". If you want to use it in a plural sense, you can either use plain "punctuation" (e.g., "Using punctuation in "US" may not be needed"), or "punctuation marks" (e.g., "Using punctuation marks in "US" may not be needed"). Hope that helps! Have a good day. Dohn joe (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello!
We hope (talk) 22:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg
PLEASE DISREGARD THIS MESSAGE, AS PROPOSAL TO DELETE THIS IMAGE UNDER THIS DELETION CRITERIA WAS DECLINED. THANK YOU! --George Ho (talk) 03:41, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

'''never mind; it is nominated for WP:FFD for violating WP:NFCC. If deleted, then I don't have to edit this message; if kept, same here.''' --George Ho (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2012 (UTC)



A tag has been placed on File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I might be your Mentor..
Hello, George. I'm a experienced editor here. Since you looked for a mentor, I'm here. Any problem, just ping me in my talk page, and I'd respond frequently. I'm always ready to help. Dipankan ( Have a chat? ) 05:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

How much effort is involved? — GabeMc (talk) 05:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Dipakan and GabeMc, you are welcome to be temporary mentors, but you are not officially permanent yet. You can prove yourselves to be reliable; to prove yourselves reliable, let's review /Mentorship discussions and its Archives and User:George Ho/Block History, especially its last section, before we proceed, okay? Under mentorship agreements, I must request anything deletion-related in /Mentorship discussions, and each request must be reviewed there before approval, rejection, alternatives, or something. However, I don't know if I want to keep one or two as temporary, but I cannot go over more than two temporary mentors. Also, there are more agreements, but you can ask either of my mentors if you don't understand.


 * Nevertheless, jc37 said in User talk:elen of the Roads that he would be a "helpful editor" for editor assistance, so I will take his word and declare him a "helpful editor", not a "mentor".


 * As for both of you, let's review before we go mootsey! --George Ho (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I'll review tomorrow if possible. Till then, I'm off to visit my grandpa! Dipankan  ( Have a chat? ) 07:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK
Just a note, ALT3 is incorrect. Marta was pregnant at the time, but not to triplets which I have corrected now. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I didn't read it carefully. It's perfectly fine. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually it's ALT1 that is incorrect. She never gave childbirth in that episode, that happened in May 1998. The episode was shot after that. Consider correcting it. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Night of the Living Dead FAR
Hi! The FAR for Night of the Living Dead (review at WP:Featured article review/Night of the Living Dead/archive1) is still open, and could use comments as to whether the article should be kept or delisted. If you have a few minutes to revisit your comments there, and perhaps enter a declaration on whether you believe the article meets the Featured Article criteria, it would be much appreciated. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for The One Where Rachel Smokes
Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Blackmark (cut from User:George Ho/Block History)
However, Elen of the Roads calls this cyberbullying. What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * If calling for discussion is bullying, then I just don't know what to say. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There you go again. You're quoting policy that doesn't exist - like the note on your talkpage that says it's Wikipedia policy to sign edits on talkpages, so you'll delete any that aren't signed, but all you link to is a note that says it's good practice to sign your edits on talkpages. There is no requirement to discuss a move - unless it's something thats a political hot potato or equivalent.  There was no reason to link it directly to his block history. There were no grounds to refer to George as disruptive. Elen of the Roads (talk) 02:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * One can establish whatever policy one wishes to on one's own talk page. There is no requirement at all for us to keep anyone's posts there.


 * No requirement to discuss a move? It's certainly proper practice to discuss a move, especially one as contentious as this, and especially if one has a history of disruptive behavior. Ask yourself: How can it possibly hurt to discuss a move and solicit input from other editors? To say that there's no requirement to do the right thing misses the point entirely.


 * You're George Ho's mentor, so you're not an objective observer as to whether his behavior is disruptive. Look how heated, defensive and emotional he became at the straightforward suggestion that he should discuss his edits. Any editor who jumps down another's throat for suggesting discussion is a hot-head, and that's disruptive. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I disagree. Being a mentor in no way implies not being neutral toward the behaviour of the mentee. There is no conflict of interest involved in volunteering to help an editor keep out of trouble. As regards Elen, she is actually the admin who blocked George for the longest time. She also imposed some very strict conditions on him. So there is nothing to suggest that she is not objective toward him. I also note that calling George a "hot-head" is too personal for comfort. Perhaps a lowering of the temperature of this discussion is needed. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg
'''THIS MESSAGE IS STRIKED OUT BECAUSE THE IMAGE WAS STILL UNDERGOING DISCUSSION. DELETED OR NOT, REMOVING THIS MESSAGE IS NOT NECESSARY'''. --George Ho (talk) 05:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Cheers
Wanna colloborate on creating article for some Cheers episodes? The first Rebecca and last Diane arent on here. Or perhps season by season articles.
 * Aslo was this QPQ] used before. i recall it was for A Young Man's World. But a new nom needs a ne review ;)(Lihaas (talk) 10:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)).
 * I'll come back in the late morning or mid afternoon. By the way, help yourself in Template:Cheers, I Do, Adieu or The Boys in the Bar. --George Ho (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I creaed Becks' first episode. Will need osurces and some oversight. Then we can nom for DYK(Lihaas (talk) 06:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)).
 * can you give it a go with some more expansionv?(Lihaas (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2012 (UTC)).
 * I would love to, but I'm researching more on the Season 1 of Cheers first. Old, but reliable microfilms of newspapers have TV ratings. --George Ho (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Where do you get that? Can we finish this to be eligible for DYK. As in next 1-2 days?
 * THen we can coordinate on new expansiosn for DYK too.(Lihaas (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)).

Merge without discussion at Musicians of the RMS Titanic
You seem to have decided to merge a group of long-standing articles (including one created in 2005) into this new article. There is no sign of any discussion at Talk:Wallace Hartley or Talk:Theodore_Ronald_Brailey, for example. The discussion at Talk:Musicians_of_the_RMS_Titanic shows no support for a merge - Prioryman suppored initially but then says "I think, to be honest, that the articles should probably be left unmerged". Please don't do this sort of thing - Wikipedia has procedures for discussing proposed mergers and you seem to have made up your own mind and gone ahead. Being WP:BOLD is one thing, but should not apply to such a major rearrangement of long-standing content. Pam D  07:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not boldly merge it; it was DONDE. --George Ho (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ...Well, I created the whole page per WP:proposed mergers. --George Ho (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I don't know the difference between merge, copy-and-paste, and redirect; I did that, regardless of my interpretations, and the merge becomes unsupported. If you want me to revert all my moves into the original forms, say so, okay? --George Ho (talk) 08:14, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * If you "don't know the difference between merge, copy-and-paste and redirect", then please stop trying to use any of them. To revert all those moves would be a lot of work, as DONDE pointed out, and, from what you've just said, would probably lead to total chaos if you tried to do it yourself. Just please remember in future not to do stuff you don't understand, and that where Wikipedia says there should be discussion, then there should be proper, properly-notified, discussion - rather than rushing to merge an article which editors since 2005 have agreed merits a freestanding existence.  Pam  D  08:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How can I understand? --George Ho (talk) 08:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * First off, don't do something if you are not sure you know how to do it. Ask first. Second, when considering merges or moves, read the talkpages - including the archives - to see if it has been discussed before. Thirdly - with merges, the main reason for merging is that there is not enough material to sustain all the articles. Usually you'll find the articles lacking content are new, and may even have been suggested for CSD or PROD, so merging them is saving the content from deletion. Long standing articles seldom need to be merged. You should treat them as off limits. Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I knew this whole miscommunication was a big mistake. I wonder if I was wrong merging all articles into one with or without excuses. I wonder if the article was a total mistake. --George Ho (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think it was probably all a horrible mistake. I wondered about trying to revert everything to the status of 19th April or so, but frankly I'm not interested enough in the Titanic to bother doing so. But please don't do this sort of highly disruptive thing again. Aren't you on some sort of restriction which is supposed to keep the encyclopedia safe? Is "If any editor requests or suggests that George not make a particular edit/particular type of edit, then George shall stop this editing until discussion with mentors can take place." still in place? It doesn't seem to have worked here. It looks as if you proposed a merger, but only to Prioryman, who initially supported but then opposed it, and you then barged ahead with it. Pam  D  20:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Must I leave Wikipedia for good, and would anybody feel better if I leave for good? If not, why is Musicians of the RMS Titanic the negative consequence more than the positive consequence? What is wrong about this article? Never mind the miscommunication I did and the biography I merged. If I'm a failure, weirdo, or chaos, then please say so and why. Why are my actions condemned instead of praised? How can I make something that can be praised, even when I would not like doing whatever it's praised and my displeasure about something that can praised would be disregarded? --George Ho (talk) 00:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I have created . I hope this helps you feel better, as I can still edit and restructure it somehow. --George Ho (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

You are now a 'helpful editor'
I have declared in my talk page that you are an editorial assistant, not a mentor. To begin, please help me on the Musicians of the RMS Titanic. However, I don't know what you mean: editor assistance. Is it assisting an article with me or something? --George Ho (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Editor_assistance. - jc37 23:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Consensus reaching of Talk:All That Jazz
The discussion was resulted as not moved per WP:NOTVOTE and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. However, I wonder if the decision was the right move; I don't want to contact the closer, JHunterJ. --George Ho (talk) 17:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll look this over shortly. - jc37 23:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, let's look over Talk:Lovin' You and Talk:Blackmark. --George Ho (talk) 12:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Woody Interruptus
This topic's notability is question, yet we editors could not conclude how to resolve this, so merger is discussed. --George Ho (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Musicians of the RMS Titanic
I have been scolded for 'disrupting' the biographies about musicians by merging them into one article. Now I have copied-and-pasted the whole thing into, so I may spend time at my sandbox version to improve. However, I've been told that the way I did this article is a chaos. --George Ho (talk) 01:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Heslington Brain.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Heslington Brain.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Ace Attorney Gyakuten Saiban 3.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Ace Attorney Gyakuten Saiban 3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Coachs Daughter.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Coachs Daughter.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. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)