User talk:Ironholds/archive16

Metastorm Article
Contacting you about deletion of Metastorm article. Thoughts on how to userfy the article? Saustin1 (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Westlife members
First time to reply, bear with me if this isn't the place to reply, i'm new to this, couldn't find a reply link to what you said on my revision. Concerning Shane Filan, does his Shafin Building company count? Or his songwriting for other artists? Don't see how other Westlife members but Kian, are involved in other projects. I'd think they all need their own page, or none of them.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianne33 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:MUSIC
Hello, I've checked the WP:Music and in the first box, it stats that a musician is notable if they have had sucess such as had their music in the charts. "Hepsi" the group, have had, and thus each member should have a page created? IE/ for more info on them as individuals such as their DOB's, where they grew up, how old they were when they released the music etc. Otherwise, surely that would be like saying certain members from "Westlife" shouldnt have their own page as some of them havent had solo careers... ? Regards (Hayalperest (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)) (Hayalperest (talk))
 * Ok, I understand and with re-directing a couple of the Westlife boys that is fair. If that is the rule than it should be enforced consistantly, and with those who have non-notable indiviual careers. So yes I agree with you. I was led to believe that along with Westlife amongst others, that all the individuals from the band could have their own pages. At least Gülçin Ergül should have an individual page as she has now gone solo and left the group Hepsi...? Regards (Hayalperest (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC))
 * Yea, cheers. Regards (Hayalperest (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC))

Could you look at Frederick Arthur Greer?
I just wrote a very short article on Frederick Greer, 1st Baron Fairfield and noticed the link to your sandbox article on Lord Birkenhead. I don't know many of the British formalities with titles, PC, KC and all that. Any help would be appreciated. Carldaniel (talk) 19:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * WOW! Thanks. I'll definitely get back to you for help (if this help was any indication of your usual), but have to say that this particular article was something of a random interest.  If there is anything I can ever do for you, please let me know.  Thanks again. Carldaniel (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

C.N.R.Rao
Hi, I noticed that you've moved Chintamani Nagesa Ramachandra Rao to Chintamani Rao by saying "per MOS" in editsummary. please move it back or move it to C.N.R.Rao. "Chintamani" is a family name, not a given name. Thanks C 21 K talk  09:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I tried to move, but page didn't moved. OK, I will make a request in WP:RM, thanks. C 21 K talk  15:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

AGT Auditions
Ironholds, i think the article i created should stay because it is a subsection of an overly crowded article, America's Got Talent (Season 4), and the larger that article gets, the harder it is to navigate. This is why i organized the auditions into another article. Cpudude91 (talk) 19:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

If you want, I will include the other acts who made it through to the next round on the page Cpudude91 (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The articles in previous seasons were set out that way because of the fewer number of auditions. In Season 3, I also considered making a separate article for the auditions. This season, the auditions are so numerous, it fills the entire page and makes it extremely hard to navigate. Cpudude91 (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I will include the acts who passed through to the next round by the end of the day.

If this article is deleted, Wikipedia users will have a difficult time navigating around one immense article. Splitting the article is an effective way to organize the info. Cpudude91 (talk) 19:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I have just included the audition info of the acts who passed through to the next round. Cpudude91 (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think you should take a look back to the Season 1, 2, and 3 pages of AGT, as well as the Season 4 page before i transferred the audition info to a different article. Because the show is diverse, the eliminated acts are included, as they have been on Wikipedia since the beginning of the show. Because Season 4 had a substantially larger number of acts who auditioned and who were eliminated or passed through, I created a different article to organize the massive first section of the original Season 4 article into a sub-article. This makes the article more organized. Cpudude91 (talk) 21:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ironholds, I think you should check again. My page also states those were the eliminated acts who were televised. Not every act which was eliminated. And, recheck this page: America's Got Talent (season 3). In the auditions section, it has a complete list of the eliminated acts who were televised. My article contains the same, a list that had every eliminated act that was televised. Check back to both Season 2 and Season 1 of AGT and you'll see the same list of eliminated acts which were televised. Cpudude91 (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure you're looking at the right article? America's Got Talent (Season 3) article has a complete list of acts who were eliminated. Same with AGT Season 2 and Season 1. My article contains the same type of list as the previous seasons, but in a different article. Cpudude91 (talk) 21:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Query: DYK for Limitation Act 1963
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

hahahaha
you aren't by any chance talking about the Seminar Paper that I'm taking a wikibreak until August 12 to write?

You are too kind. OK, I'm going to postpone this task for a bit. But I'm happy to do the work myself. Or, feel free to "assign" me a segment of the alphabet. Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 02:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * {| style="border: 1px solid ; background-color: ;"


 * rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar-RoyaltyNobility.png]]
 * rowspan="2" |
 * style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | The Royal Editor Barnstar
 * style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For being a prince of an editor, and volunteering to do the work to keep WP:LAW running smoothly (and enabling me to do my homework), I dub you a Royal Editor! Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 03:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * }
 * }

Arno Schmidt Foundation
Hi Ironholds, perhaps you are interested on the further development, which I commented in User talk:€pa. I think a was treated merciless. Greetings -- €pa (talk) 15:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC) After all, "merciless" not by you. Greetings -- €pa (talk) 23:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Edward Coke
Looks like you've made a good start, and I'll be interested to see how it progresses. If I can be of any assistance, please let me know. What is your overall outline for the rewrite? Groundsquirrel13 (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyright, IP law, legal advice, etc.
My advice to you, sort-of-lawyer to lawyer, is to avoid the discussion of law on WP. Hammersoft was not representing the views of WP in his comments, only his own. Wikipedia employs a dedicated lawyer, Mike Godwin, to deal with any matters IP related or otherwise, and you are not, as an anonymous bloke over the internet, qualified to give a legal opinion any more than Hammersoft is. Ironholds (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ironholds, thank you for one of the more reasonable responses that I have received regarding this tempest in a teapot. Your comments are well taken.  From your Talk page and use of British vernacular, I would be curious to know whether you are either an Anglophile American lawyer or a UK barrister or solicitor.  I did a semester as a law school exchange student in England, and I have very fond memories of my time in the UK and my British professors.


 * I was asked to get involved in the WikiProject University of Florida by a classmate who wanted to see our alma mater better represented on Wikipedia than it was by the several less-than-scholarly articles covering UF-related topics. Frankly, I was appalled by the quality of writing and signed on to clean up about two dozen high-priority articles, so that folks seeking information about UF would not think less of the university when they read the Wiki articles about it.  That's why I'm on WikipediaI'm on a short-term mission to satisfy


 * As for today's contretemps, you are correct, sir, I should not be positing legal opinions on copyright, or any other legal matters, anonymously, on Wikipedia. I am a Florida and Georgia-licensed corporate and commercial real estate lawyer.  I am not a U.S. IP specialist by any means, and, even if I were, it is professionally inadvisable to hand out anonymous legal opinions.  When the other gentleman in this matter began to lay down his understanding of the "law" hard and fast, without any knowledge of the underlying facts and circumstances of the particular artwork or photo, it was apparent that he had absolutely no grasp of the dozens of circumstances and exceptions to the hard-and-fast copyright "safe harbor" rule that he was quoting as law and unchallenged Wikipedia copyright policy.  I picked up the telephone and called a law school classmate who practices IP law full-time in Seattle.  There are literally dozens of scenarios where the 1946 sculptor's copyright has probably been lost to the public domain . . ..


 * The artist's failure to register a U.S. copyright in 1946-1947; the failure to reserve copyright with a circle "c" icon on the artwork itself; the failure to renew the copyright in its 28th year (1974) according to then-applicable copyright law; the fact that the artwork was a commissioned "artwork for hire" in which the artist's copyright is presumed, as a matter of law, to be transferred to the owner and commissioning party (the State of Florida) in the absence of a written agreement to the contrary. These are just a handful of the probable exceptions to the 1923 "safe harbor" rule cited by the self-appointed enforcer of Wikipedia copyright policy.  BTW, as it was explained to me by someone far better versed in U.S. copyright law than I ever hope to be, in the absence of a copyright registration or the reservation of circle "c" rights, the presumption is in favor of public domain use of the artwork's image.  What's the practical significance of this, you ask?  In the absence of a registration, the artist can only demand that you cease and desist in the use of an image of artwork IF he actually has a retained copyright.  In the absence of a registration, damages are not available as a remedy unless the user of the image has actual knowledge of the existence of the artist's retained copyright.  If the artist has a retained copyright, he can demand that the user cease in its use.


 * Furthermore, the self-appointed enforcers of Wikipedia copyright law, like Hammersoft, seem to have a very crabbed view of the American concept of "fair use." Most American IP attorneys start by analyzing whether the use has any commercial or pecuniary value to the user.  In the absence of commercial use, which is supposedly absent from all Wikipedia encyclopedia articles, a colorable argument can almost always be made that the use of the photograph or image of the artwork has an educational aspect thus qualifying it for a "fair use" exception.  The hard-and-fast position taken by Hammersoft makes the "fair use" doctrine pretty darn close to meaningless, and, yes, as a laymen he is unqualified to be making such determinations.  If Wikipedia is going to permit "fair use" exceptions to images still subject to possible copyrights, then Wikipedia needs to have individuals who are qualified to evaluate those exceptions which are put forward by image uploaders and article editors.  Otherwise, just adopt a strict rule and cease any pretense of evaluating "fair use" exceptions.


 * Anyhoo, Ironholds, thank you for reading my extended vent on your Talk page. I feel much better now.  If this issue cannot be resolved in the Wiki copyright forum, I will take it up with Mr. Godwin.  As a former corporate general counsel myself, I am sure Mr. Godwin has far bigger issues to resolve than my very small complaint, and I will only approach him as an absolute last resort.


 * Thank you, once again, for your comment and understanding. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently some way down the long route to becoming a barrister - I'm qualified to practice in a massive zero legal jurisdictions :P. Wikipedia users normally deal with fair/free use decisions in a "broad strokes" manner because most of them aren't lawyers, which can be a bit infuriating because of technicalities that can turn the validity of their decisions on its head. Still, there are some excellent users who can help you with this sort of thing - User:Geni has an annoyingly good grasp of US intellectual property law as it relates to images for someone with a Chemistry degree. If you'd like a third opinion but don't want to bother Mike, I'd go to him or (possibly) User:Jdforrester, who has a good grasp of copyright law and used to be the Wikimedia Foundation gopher. He has a rather long response time on his talkpage, though. Best, Ironholds (talk) 03:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you, sir. This is exactly the sort of advice and referral to the in-house experts that I was seeking in the first instance.  If needed, I will gladly seek out Geni and Jdforrester for further discussion and advice on the current issue or related copyright topics.


 * Since returning home around 9:30 PM EDT, I have been following the discussion among the Wiki copyright experts on the discussion page (without commenting myself). It seems that one of the Wiki greybeards has found a related "public domain" rationale for the use of images of public statuary.  Apparently, there is ample evidence from third-party sources, including the Smithsonian and one or more art registration services, that the statue in question has long been in the public domain based on its public display for 60+ years.  There's even an already approved photo in WikiCommons.


 * Good look with your qualification as a barrister. Very different standards of education and practice in the UK and the USA.  We get much more formal legal education than you, but far less practical experience, before the powers-that-be unleash us on the unsuspecting public.  I have been a corporate and commercial real estate transactional attorney for 12 years, but I dip my toe in real estate and construction-related litigation from time to time.  The substantive law is easy given my transactional background, and fortunately I have friends who help keep me out of the civil procedure ditch by looking over my shoulder.


 * If you're ever on this side of the pond and in need of a pint, please consider this a standing invitation to take advantage of our Southern hospitality in Atlanta. I have several Oxford classmates, including one attractive female lawyer, who would feel honor-bound to fill your glass.  Cheersand get some sleep, my peace-making friend.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology deletion
regarding ==Copyright problems with Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology== Hello. Concerning your contribution, Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and CC-BY-SA, under CC-BY-SA, or released into the public domain leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Kartik 07:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

This is in regard to your request for deletion of Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology page. Please state how can you apply for this. We have the required permission from the authorities of the website and the college and it is our college, we are the students of the college. The chairman of the college and website owner has given us permission for the same. Please remove your notice at the earliest or discuss the same at college talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camcool (talk • contribs) 07:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick note
Wikipedia and the legal word don't line up, I'm afraid - WP hates id. and ibid. You can use WP:REFNAME instead if you want to cite something multiple times. Ironholds (talk) 05:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, sometimes we learn by doing, and I've been made painfully aware of some of Wikipedia's more idiosyncratic citation formats. As you may have discovered, my rewritten articles tend to generate a few footnotes.  I am still waiting on additional historical reference materials that our university historian is shipping to me.  Once I have layered in those additional references into my UF history and bio articles, I planned to make the final version of the footnotes Wiki compliant.


 * Any interest in helping with those Wiki footnote citation formats when I'm ready to proceed in a couple of weeks? You can check out the Andrew Sledd article for evidence of my recent handiwork.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

For you

 * Thanks! Ironholds (talk) 12:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

DAFMM Adminship
Ironholds,

Thanks very much for the information. Hopefully I will be successfull! Nowonder you got a Barnstar for kindness!!!

Thanks again.

With compliments.

DAFMM (talk), 13th August 2009.


 * I know. I don't think so either. It will be a laugh! I can always try again! DAFMM (talk), 13th August 2009. P. S. If I fail is there anything less competitive I can help out in?


 * I know!!! The problem is is that I have used my on knowledge! When I have a spare minute I am going to do it! It's just getting around to it! I am a busy man. DAFMM (talk), 13th August 2009.

My Adminship Again
Ironholds,

Fair point.

With compliments.

DAFMM (talk), 13th August 2009.

Journal article
Ironholds, at your convenience, could you provide a weblink to, or e-mail a copy of, "Andrew Sledd, Southern Methodists, and the Negro: A Case History," from the Journal of Southern History? When I was doing my internet searches on Sledd a couple of weeks ago, I found multiple reference to the article, but could not find an electronic or PDF image version posted on line. With gratitude for all your assistance. . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I downloaded the pdf. Ironholds, if you get to this before me, just let me know, but I'll send Dirt the article if he wants. Protonk (talk) 01:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to do it if you want, I think I may have deleted it actually :S. Ironholds (talk) 01:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. I've been on JSTOR all day and when I saw this I thought "Oh!  Something useful!" Protonk (talk) 01:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto, grabbing stuff for my coke rewrite. Ironholds (talk) 01:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Aww, wrong coke. Protonk (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually it was pronounced "cook" or "kuke" anyway, which led to frequent jokes and misunderstanding. His big rival was Francis Bacon, leading to the joke about "a bacon too tough for this cock" when he fell out of favour. Ironholds (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The good ol bawdy English. Protonk (talk) 01:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh dear oh dear, that bawdy bard. They had a brilliant sense of humour - my favourite is the tale of the disputes between Anglicans and Catholics at the University of Cambridge during that period. When the Cardinal came to restore some kind of order a group of Anglican undergraduates managed to tonsure his horse. Ironholds (talk) 01:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of maintenance templates
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from B. Thomas Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 19:34, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * DTTR. Protonk (talk) 19:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I linked him to that in my reply. Amusingly enough there's a template instructing users not to template the regulars. Ironholds (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * a cycle which may have no discernible end. Protonk (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Me trying to understand Godel's incompleteness theorems - that is something with no discernible end. I'm worse at maths than I am at speeling. Ironholds (talk) 20:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Try GEB. So long as you are up on your Zeno, your Alice and your Plato you might stand a chance. Protonk (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

2009 West Kelowna Fires
I've proposed that 2009 West Kelowna Fires be merged into Kelowna, and removed the PROD tag. I think the fire article may have a little more potential in the Kelowna article--it may have to be put into all one section, though. What do you think?--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 22:11, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Select Committee of the House of Lords on the Women's Royal Air Force
Hi there - I have a hold on this at GAN pending you chekcing out that reference. Are you still planning to do this? cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I've been completely zonked and the reference wouldn't really help - having had a readthrough it should be retitled One Hormonal British Woman On How It Was Everyone Else's Fault, by Violet Douglas-Pennant. Unless you want statements along the lines of "they accused me of this because they were fucking each other senseless and didn't want to get in trouble" it's unfortunately of no use :(. Looks like we'll have to work with what we've got. Ironholds (talk) 22:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, OK. Sounds like quite a book ;-) hamiltonstone (talk) 05:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Capercaillie concert tours
I don't know if this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion but I do think that this article is appropriate and useful ! Check the Rolling Stones', Deep Purple's or McCartney's wikipedia web pages : all of them include a concert tours article !!! I try to edite this Capercaillie concert tours article since I created it and as long as I have new informations to update it !

Lurulu (talk) 00:41, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Dramaonly
I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 01:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you send me a copy of the page "15 minutes webshow"?
Can you send me a copy of the page "15 minutes webshow"? It got deleted. Can you send me a copy? thanks, Joey Musial On the 8th day, God made Star Wars geeks. The next day, he said &quot;!@#$ those Warsies, Kill &#39;em and make trekkies instead. And God was happy. (talk)

Talkback
I dream of horses @  01:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 01:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

On the 8th day, God made Star Wars geeks. The next day, he said &quot;!@#$ those Warsies, Kill &#39;em and make trekkies instead. And God was happy. (talk) 20:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/HMA v Ritchie and Morren
Could you take a look at this AfD? I've been trying to rescue the article, based on my experience that non-legal editors have a poor insight into the notability of court cases. But in this instance, User:DGG seems to be right that there's nothing notable about this case. Since it's a Scotland case dealing with a UK statute, your contribution could decide the AfD. Thanks. Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 01:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Notability guidelines
Sounds good to me. Would you like to take a crack at writing WP:CASES, i.e. WP:Notability (court cases) / WP:Notability (law). Then if more needs to be ironed out, we can do it at the talk page there.

By the way, we just hit 3,000,000 articles. Beate Eriksen, apparently. Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 04:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Bob Cull
Bob Cull is one of the founders of contemporary Christian music and had several number one chart positions in the early 80's. He is also one of the producers that began the Jesus Movement music. Today he is also a noted pastor and theologian. He IS notable, and I would appreciate it if you would stop editing other people's posts because you think that you know better. In this case you clearly don't. Themoodyblue (talk) 17:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

And since you have ALREADY deleted it, outside of wikipedia policy which clearly allows for a discussion period, put the damn thing back! Who do you think you are anyway? Themoodyblue (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

My problem is this, and this is a big problem throughout wikipedia. Who are you to unilaterally decide what is notable and what is not? That is what the discussion is supposed to be for. You have made over 35 changes to articles just today - do you do anything other than troll Wikipedia and correct all of us lesser mortals? Get a life and get off my back, and my entries, please! Themoodyblue (talk) 17:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

"Oh, and thanks for this as well. As my above points explained, it's you who seems to have a void in your knowledge somewhere. Avoid making personal comments and taking this to unrelated forums - it's hardly going to endear myself or any administrator looking to restore the page to you, is it? Ironholds (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2009 (UTC)" What on earth are you talking about? Themoodyblue (talk) 17:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid that some of you in the wikipedia universe have a different view than I do. You win. That is what you wanted, correct? Whatever. This is your bailiwick - I give up trying to understand arrogance at this level. Themoodyblue (talk) 17:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Wireless Latin Entertainment
You might be interested.  SilkTork  *YES! 18:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Brill, thanks for bringing that to my attention. Ironholds (talk) 18:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

A-1_Club article has been slated as Afd
I have removed the prod tag from A-1_Club, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Zul32 (talk) 20:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from A-1 Club
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to A-1 Club has been removed. It was removed by 2005 with the following edit summary ' (changes made to show notability so removing tag for now) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with 2005 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

DYK
You, motherland-occupier.

I see you're involved with DYK. Reckon you could pull a hook out of Foulées_du_Gois for me?

Cheers,

That Australian Loser 04:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Inns of Chancery
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

Mail
You have one. WilliamH (talk) 13:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Review
Hi. I have nothing to do with the Act of Sederunt article. However, I noticed that you failed it without a review. Can you please explain why? Thanks, Alan16 (talk) 17:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Thanks for that. Would it not be good, though, to post a review at the designated place (Talk:Act of Sederunt/GA1) in case somebody like myself wanted to update it? Alan16 (talk) 17:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Article
I couldn't find the article that you wanted. The link is lost somewhere. Could you post it on my talk page in a section so I can go and look? Ottava Rima (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

2010 films
As of this posting the tag does not link to the Afd discussion.-- The LegendarySky Attacker 03:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

AUTREV
Thanks for the Autoreviewer nomination, I appreciate the vote of confidence and shall do my best to use it well.--RadioFan (talk) 11:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Band: Sixteen Cities
Hello, my user name is His_Warrior, and if you don't mind, I would like to talk with you about my article that you deleted, Sixteen Cities. I have been reading over the WP:Band article, and I have found some flaws within the reasons that all the Wikipedia users who wanted the article deleted, stated. First, in the very first paragraph of the WP:Band article, it states that "failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is 'not' a criterion for speedy deletion." It also goes on to say that "a mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7." You see, my article did state significance in many places. First, I put that "the band is working on producing their first studio album, Sixteen Cities." That qualifies for SOME degree of significance right there. Also, simply because the independent record label they are signed to is not included in wikipedia, doesn't mean it's not major, or not significant enough. Most likely, someone just hasn't taken the time to research Centricity Records and make an article for it, although if you look at the record company's site: www.centricitymusic.com, you will see that some of the major independent artists are signed to this label. Another point I would like to make, is that if you scroll down on the WP:Band article, and look under the heading titled: Critera for Musicians and Ensembles, it states that "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) may be notable if it meets any 'one' of the following criteria: Then under the Others Heading on the WP:Band article it states:
 * Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable." Which my article has been. If you look at the sources list, and also places within the article it is stated that "Sixteen Cities has been featured on independent Christian artist sites", and that "their music is played on Word of Truth Radio's acoustic praise station." I probably should have put the fact that it is in daily rotation on that radio station, because one of you made the very valid point that while it has been played, it could have only been once. So I see where I should have reworded that there, because it IS in fact played daily on this station, and just because the radio station is online, it still qualifies as a radio station. The WP:Band article doesn't say that it can't be an online radio station. Also, the Sixteen Cities article stated that "In the spring of 2009, the band received the opportunity to perform on the Gospel music awards tour," which states that they are obviously getting up there in the music industry, and slowly but steadily becoming popular. While this next piece of information was not mentioned in my article, I feel compelled to tell you that they are also going to be going on another major tour this december, called Youth For Christ, and it is in Denmark. This shows even more significance on their part. Also, in a past version of the article, they were discussed on many other third-party sources, namely New-Release Tuesday, which is not self-published, and is NOT a blog or first party source. They were also on www.jpgmag.com, which is a third-party source that helps promote and sponser and advertise independent Christian artists, as well as some of the major artists. The WP:Band article also states that it is notable if it:
 * "Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country," which it does too. As mentioned before, they got to during the entire Gospel Music Awards Tour (national), and they are going to Youth For Christ Denmark tour in December this year too (international).
 * "Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability." Again, they are. In fact, in their hometown of Portland, Oregon, they are usually one of the only Christian bands you hear about playing. Also, for the last six years, they have been the ONLY band to play at a youth event in the pacific northwest, called Forklift. It is every year over President's Day weekend, and Sixteen Cities has been the only band to play every year there under both their old name and new name, for the last six years.
 * "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc." Again, they have also done this. They have been included on a compiliation album. In 2008, their song Heaven's Lullaby was included on a compilation CD of independent artists titled: "Rock Rwanda" by Downbeat Sounds.
 * "Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network." Yet again, they have been. On Word of Truth Radio's Acoustic Praise Station, they are played daily on there, and their radio drop date was on July 10, 2009. They are played in rotation, daily on local radio stations, especially in Spokane, "105.9 Spirit FM, and Portland 104.1 the Fish FM. I would like to point out that one of the editors made the claim that 105.9 doesn't count because Spokane is a relatively small city and doesn't reach that many people. This claim is actually false, because according the United States Census Bureau, we have over 400,000 people in our city, and according to the Wikipedia article Spokane, Washington it states that Spokane is the "second largest city in the state of Washington, after Seattle." So it most likely would reach a large audience from 105.9 Spirit FM.
 * "Is cited in reliable sources as being influential in style, technique, repertory or teaching in a particular music genre." They sort of fulfill this requirement with their internship program called Chronologic Solutions because the Sixteen Cities article states that "Also known as the Chronologic Internship Program, its president is Josiah Warneking, the lead singer of the band. The internship is described as "an opporunity for students to obtain practical experience and gain valuable knowledge in the music industry through a 'nationally signed band called Sixteen Cities.'" http://chronologic-soultions.blogspot.com/ The program was founded to offer students an opportunity to gain experience in the music industry, and earn college credit in the process." Yes, I know it is from blogspot, but that is NOT really a blog, it is the only website that was able to be set up pertaining to Chronologic Solutions and is NOT a first-party source at all. It just happens to be on blogspot.
 * One last thing I would like to point out is that they have three radio singles that they just released in July, on Centricity records, they are "Someone's Work of Art, Pray you Through, and Undivided," all released in 2009 under the Centricity records label. If you would like to discuss this article more with me, please contact me on my talk page. Swayze (talk) 16:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, so I reviewed your message, and you appear to be correct, but I do think the rest of the administrators need to be one-hundred percent clear as you were in your message, especially in the WP:Band article. That was quite helpful to me, what you said. SO do you think I should just wait till they get another CD made under that label, because their singles haven't been on charts as of yet, but they probably will be in the future. Thanks for all your help. Swayze (talk) 17:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

RFC of Malleus Fatuorum
I invite you to comment on Requests for comment/Malleus Fatuorum, which I have filed.--Ipatrol (talk) 18:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't keep count of who I've upset or who I haven't, but I'd like to thank you for being a voice of sanity whether or not we've disagreed in the past. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Nandor Vadas
Regardless of however the hell this AfD goes, I wanted to stop and take a minute to thank you for your attention to detail. The discussion over notability of Article I judges has merit, and despite our disagreement, it is good that it is occurring.

I myself plan to be an attorney and think that your detail oriented mindset will serve you well when you become a member of the Inns of Court (are you going to take silks?). If I am ever in the UK, remind me to buy you a beer ;). Thanks, Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * With regards to the nomination, how do I create a massive case? Do I just move the AfD page to US Magistrate Judges and attach deletion banners to each article? Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I am finishing up high school, which is 1 year plus undergraduate degree 4 years, master's (1 year) and law school (3 years). It generally takes 7, but I want a masters :P. I will wander by WP LAW and poke at the proposal shortly and thanks for the advice. Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My overall dream is to get a Doctorate in Legal Science (JSD), because I want the option of teaching. Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I know that, and it isn't calculated in yet. Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Dorothy Parker, Jake Wartenberg, and other trivia
For what it's worth, the notorious entry at the Hearst Castle guestbook was written anonymously. I looked up several sources regarding it a while back, and each of the retellings (in reputable sources) claims to quote it directly while reporting a slightly different wording and a slightly different background story. When visiting the Castle itself asked a guide about the discrepancies, who politely declined any comment about it--including refusing to answer a query about the guestbook's actual whereabouts (one would suppose it's in their archives somewhere). Which leaves the impression that perhaps it might be a high class urban legend. All sources agree upon only two facts: that she was a guest in 1935 and was asked to leave very early, and that she exceeded Hearst's quota for cocktails. Beyond that the tales range from having broken protocol a second time by lighting a cigarette at the dinner table, to getting caught in a compromising position with a servant (as that version has it, the position was about as mutually compromising as it could possibly get). Parker herself denied authorship on the grounds that her professional standards would never permit misrhyming "honor" with "Madonna"...but she denied none of the surrounding rumors. ;) Durova  305 23:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Trivia
Help me out here. The article I nominated for deletion, to my understanding would have had to be rewritten to come within the scope of the project and allowed entry. I do not consider five lines of unreferenced material to be close to an article as written it was only a small fact sheet about an olympic athlete. What am I missing here? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Bonei Olam
Hi, I've created an article about an extremely popular jewish non-profit organization that is world famous in the ultra-orthodox jewish community. This organization deserves to be on Wikipedia just as every other Humanitarian organization that exists. I know that much info is still missing, but that precisely is the reason why I put it as a stub. I also believe that this goes into the category of Don't demolish the house while it's still being built. So if you can just put it back with a speedy deletion notice, so I can challenge it with reson on the talk page I'd really appriciate it. Thanks in advance. GeredtErnst (talk) 11:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of X-men mutants of tomorrow
Hi, i don´t know why you are trying to delete my page. It is a page about a tv series that i have created and i prefear it to stay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey what´s up
Hi, can you help me to find some pages that i could delete or that i can create? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

ok
What i meaned with that was if you could help me to create a decent page about something important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC) :here:: well I am good at Movies and Comics.
 * Reason :: Well i´ve seen another page with an invented x-men programe and so i had the idea to create one live action, inventing some stories to pass the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * At least let me have some of the episodes i´ve created still on my page, if the x-men page is going to be deleted there is no problem in ading some episode guides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ok :: you are the bossAdrianos1995 (talk) 18:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * yes:: i think that i can put them in my page right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianos1995 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

by the way
What's the status in the UK of jokes about Scots and goats? The only thing I know about Scotland, I know from watching Star Trek, and dirty jokes. I hope I haven't been (too) offensive. Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 19:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Daily Journal (Missouri)
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Daily Journal (Missouri) has been removed. It was removed by BryanG with the following edit summary ' (deprod, daily papers are usually notable, at least want full AfD on this...) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with BryanG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Ralgouls
There are ZERO Google hits for Ralgouls. It's not a real concept, a real character, or a real anything. If creating an article about something that doesn't exist isn't vandalism, I don't know what is. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A google search with the singular word "Ralgoul" gives me a single hit... to a discussion forum... and it's something about a "Ralgoul virus", although it is "in universe". I placed the DB template in good faith, as the article made little sense and it appeared to be a made up word. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
OK. Will do on the article's talk. Thanks for letting me know. Airplaneman talk 19:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Marj Al-hamam
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Marj Al-hamam has been removed. It was removed by Snigbrook with the following edit summary ' (remove prod, clarify, add references) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Snigbrook before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 23:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

paramore
why do u have to delete my page? i spend a long time on that and i cant see y u cant include it... Parafan 2 (talk) 06:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So am i victorious? Parafan 2 (talk) 06:35, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * so can you add my List of Paramore songs page under discography on the Paramore wikipedia article? Parafan 2 (talk) 07:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

editix
Please stop. Why do you want to remove my page, this is a page description about a usual editor ?? This is a short description of an existing product, a product is also a piece of information. Various XML Editor (proprietary) are already available like Oxygen XML Editor, delete too this page List of XML editors. Sorry I disagree with your wishes, this is an information page about a product like other products, people may want to have information about a product too, you should remove macintosh, windows too because this is commercial activities ???

Marat Alykov
I don't you should use speedy deletions for these kinds of articles. A simple Google search (or reading the used source) reveals that he may well be notable. IMHO, you should use AfD instead. Offliner (talk) 13:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Zynga'd
Hey, just letting you know that while I agree with your PROD rationale on Zynga'd, I've changed the deletion to speedy (WP:CSD), as the page has been deleted a AfD before. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

GAN review of Select Committee of the House of Lords on the Women's Royal Air Force
I have reviewed the above nomination and found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Select Committee of the House of Lords on the Women's Royal Air Force/GA1. Please respond there, thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Statutes
Sorry I've taken so long to get back to you. I couldn't find anything about William Paull and William Bateman in my books but the Oxford DNB online has articles on both of them. Hope that helps!--Britannicus (talk) 09:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Mayong (Assam)
OK, fine. But why are you removing the reference?--Xeteli (talk) 09:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sri Bhagawan Mahaveer Jain College
Sorry mate, just thought you were a spammer. Well, actually I just copied all the text from the college website, so I guess it will be spammy after all. I'll try to keep it neutral next time. Thanks! Swaroop (talk) 12:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Don't get me started on it. Its my college and I get permission to do such stuff.Swaroop (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I know..If the text itself isn't copyrighted, there won't be any qualms right? Swaroop (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't get you. So if I refine the text, and make it in a non-spammy way, It'll be right I presume? Swaroop (talk) 14:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I enquired with my principal, he says that it isn't so. Only the JGI logo is copyrighted. Swaroop (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks mate, I'll get that. Swaroop (talk) 14:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

A request
In the interests of collegiality and civil meaningful discussion could you pause in your nominations?

I find it is not possible to give meaningful responses, and to conduct meaningful re-research, when another contributor starts a unpredictably long chain of nominations. If one finds more references for one or several of those articles, it is not really possibly to enhance those articles, when one faces an unpredictably long chain of nominations.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not suggesting you started this chain of nominations out of bad faith. I am not suggesting you are wikihounding me.

But, I would appreciate you pausing, to give the wikipedia's discussion procedures a chance to work.

Further, I know different people have different interpretations of WP:BOLD, WP:BATTLEGROUND, WP:CIV. My own interpretation of these policies has me attempt to discuss my concerns with other contributors when I notive a pattern that triggers a concern for me. I know I have worked on controversial topics. So I make extra effort to make sure my efforts fully comply with policy. And, realizing that I am fallible, we are all fallible, I make an effort to give a civil, meaningful response to every civil concern voiced, or hinted at, among my contributions.

If you notice some other contributions I made, that trigger a concern for you, is there any way you would consider writing me first? Sometimes people write me to me, and I realize some contribution I made was not well-advised after all, or that it did not, after all, comply with policy. And, when I realize I made a mistake I do my very best to openly acknowledge that, and to fix the problem myself. I think, in the long run, this saves time, because it doesn't require the time and energy of additional contributors reading and participating in an afd, or other discussion.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 18:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I got your reply. Thanks.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Free Bingo Page
Hello, I have recently added an article about free bingo and I feel it is a notable variation of the term bingo. Its an evolution of bingo which is becoming massively popular online and therefore I think it is a worthy addition to wikipedia. Please let me know your thoughts. Thank you kindly, Jake.

Notable Velamas
I created a new page. Editing is going on. For your info.Kumarrao (talk) 10:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

One serving of salt, coming up.
I wish to high heaven that people would actually read the rules before they go and post copyrighted material. :) Thanks for the kind words; off to the salt mines!  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Exinda listing
Hi there Ironholds, I will send through a copyright authorization email from Exinda's CFO within a day or two authorizing use of the material referenced from their web site. I have also made some edits to the page to hopefully address the copyright concerns. Can you hold off deleting the Exinda entry until their emails come through?

Hass2009 (talk) 20:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:
 * PROD removed from Phil Jones (footballer), by User:RoverTheBendInSussex, with summary '(Removing as Phil Jones will be making his 1st team debut in League Cup vs Gillingham tomorrow. Not to mention he was today given a 1st shirt no. Which is why i have created his profile.)'
 * PROD removed from Golems Universal Constructor, by User:Axanon, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Explanation
Obviously (I sent you an e-mail, as well, you may ignore that as I suspect that this is faster), I need an explanation as to why the British Tolkien Society can have their own Wiki page, while the Danish may not. It's not only the BTS who merits an English site; we frequently meet up with other TS's from all over the world, and as far as I know, Danish is only spoken in Denmark. Oh, and many of the other Scandinavian Tolkien Societies have pages, too... now please do explain to me why the Danish one is more irrelevant - apart from to you, of course. I am seriously sick of the standard "your comment has been deleted, please refer to our help page" reply without further comments.

Ethuil o Lorien (talk) 06:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * @Ethuil o Lorien - I am sure you will get a reply from Ironholds soon. Just a suggestion - if you have a chance please take a look at WP:WHYNOT.  Each article must stand up in it's own merit, not based on claimed similarity to other existing articles.  Also, by your use of the term "we" above I think you may want to review the conflict of interest policy.   7  06:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Organisations need to pass the guideline at WP:ORG - yours did not. As it happens neither does the British one, so I've nominated that for deletion too. Ironholds (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

@7: I think you are overanalyzing my use of the word "we" here. There is no conflict of interest between Bri and any other TS - as a matter of fact, all similar societies interact with each other on extremely friendly terms. All of them are non-profit organisation, and as we are based in different corners of the world, we have no need or will to try to "compete" with each other. When you say "must stand up on its own merit" - exactly what does that entail? To me, I'm sorry to say, it still sounds like "must be of value to the people in charge", or "must be sought for by x % of the population."

@Ironholds - what part of the ORG do you mean?


 * We are covered in quite a few outside, independent sources that I could link to, but they, surprisingly, are all in Danish and probably wouldn't make sense to anyone else.
 * We are not advertising anything. It's a non-profit organisation.
 * As far as non-commercial organisations go, we can fulfill the following:

"Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:

The scope of their activities is national or international in scale. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources. (In other words, they must satisfy the primary criterion for all organizations as described above.) "

(I personally have yet to see any such thing in any article here, actually, but please do point them out to me.)

In what ways do "we" (term loosely used now, apparently) not live up to those standards?

Ethuil o Lorien (talk) 12:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * By "we", 7 meant you seem to be representing the Danish tolkein society. You need to provide those references, then - even if you fulfil alternate criteria, independent sources are still required. Ironholds (talk) 13:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I am not worried about a conflict between your society and the other societies.  What I am worried about, and what Wikipedia needs to avoid, is having articles written by people with conflicts which may not represent a neutral point of view on the topic.  Please take a look at those links and it should make more sense.  Thanks.   7  13:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

All the nobility microstubs
By definition, nobility is more significant than the common people, so a claim of nobility is an obvious claim of significance that's sufficient to avoid speedy deletion. I expect that many of these individuals are notable (after all, several centuries ago the English nobility often had significant local power and would effectively pass WP:POLITICIAN), but without proof of such I'm not going to argue that these individuals are notable. Nyttend (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, my edit summary "A claim of notability is sufficient to avoid speedy deletion" included a typo: I meant to say "A claim of nobility..." I type "notability" much more often than I type "nobility", and after I made the error on the first summary, copy/pasting the summary ensured that it would be repeated.  Sorry to confuse you as to my intentions.  Nyttend (talk) 14:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments :-) I understand baronets not having power, but the earls didn't have real power at this time?  I would have guessed that they would effectively have been "People who have held...first-level sub-national political office."  As I said, however, I'm not going to argue from something that I don't really understand.  Nyttend (talk) 14:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

B1/B2
Is there a reason you redirected the article on invitation letters to B1/B2 visas? Although it is in regard to that visa type, no where in the redirect page does it address the how to of the letter--what goes into it, etc. Furthermore, I had the Consular Section of the US Embassy read before I posted it to verify accuracy. The purpose was to help people understand and clarify what they needed to include in such letters and your redirect does them a disservice. Bronwenelizabeth (talk) 17:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't make Chinface Puppet up.
See here. occono (talk) 00:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try and find some notable sources then. It was a redlink in Puppet. occono (talk) 00:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I added two sources but they're not very good. Maybe you should go ahead and cutlist it again. occono (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
You have new messages at List of Wikiquotes Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

RallyE rim
If you look at the 1969 Buick order form I included as a reference you will see the option is for a "Rallye Rim" and although it isn't conventional spelling today, that is how it was spelled and sold in 1969. That being said, if you know how to redirect, can you also direct the words "Rally Wheel" "Rallye Wheel" "Rally Wheels" "Rallye Wheels" "Rally Rims" and "Rallye Rims" to my article too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeskylark68 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:
 * PROD removed from Chuk Yuen Estate, by User:Colonel Warden, with summary '(Cleanup)'
 * PROD removed from N&J Quarterly, by User:Goochscoop, with summary '(Added several more lines of content to the original stub article.)'
 * PROD removed from Scott Bylewski, by User:Eriehistorian, with summary '(This entry should be considered for WP: Politicians due to Scott Bylewski's role in the town's response to the crash of Flight 3407. This was a major media event and Scott was quoted widely in media.)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Australain Daytime Television Schedule
Well tell me, Ironholds why the hell have you alowed a American daytime schedule page but not an Australian one

Please don't delete it. There would be a lot of people who would be interested. Tell me why it isn't sutable for the encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by StilltheOne9 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

But it is not intended to be a electric programming guide. It is intended for educational purposes only. Waht do you mean by not an indiscriminate collection of information  —Preceding unsigned comment added by StilltheOne9 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

So what are you going to do, delete it? StilltheOne9 (talk) 12:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

So can we agree to keep it or not? StilltheOne9 (talk) 12:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I mean can we agree to keep all of the page's I've have spent my time making? StilltheOne9 (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, so what are the odds of the page being kept —Preceding unsigned comment added by StilltheOne9 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Just have a bloody heart and kept the pages. StilltheOne9 (talk) 12:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Fine, I just want an answer yes or no? StilltheOne9 (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

So there is nothing bar this disscusiion that can help save the pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by StilltheOne9 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I see that it has been on the verge of being deleted. Is there any way I can open up the disscussion again. I can list points of why it should stay

1. It has historcial importance 2. It is Educational 3. A nice bit of Australian Television History —Preceding unsigned comment added by StilltheOne9 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

So what are you going to do

Act of Sederunt
I have ammended the article Act of Sederunt in response to your assessment and I would appreciate if you could have a look and let me know what you think. Davidkinnen (talk) 22:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

reply
WRT your assertion I am a hypocrite...


 * 1) You think another contributor insulted you. And you demanded an apology, and a retraction.
 * 2) Then, later, your own comments grew to include increasingly personal reflections on my character, motives, judgment, intelligence and suspected hidden motives.
 * 3) I reminded you that discussions are supposed to be about content issues, not the personalities of the partcipants.
 * 4) You call me a hypocrite, because I didn't challenge the other contributor who you believed insulted you.

That other contributor and I have worked on many articles together. We don't always agree on editorial issues. We don't always agree on how best to respond to challenges on editorial issues.

I do sometimes remind one contributor of the wikipedia's civility policies, when their lapse from civility was addressed at another contributor. I don't always do so. And, when I do, I am most likely to speak up when the contributor at the receiving end seems to be a newbie.

In your particular case:
 * 1) You didn't seem to be a newbie
 * 2) I thought the other contributor had made some good points on editorial matters.
 * 3) The "action", as it were, was over by the time I arrived -- and you seemed to have "given as good as you got".
 * 4) Different contributors have different ideas as to how much WP:AGF they should extend, before they can say, "My good faith is exhausted. I no longer feel obliged to extend AGF to this particular contributor, because their interactions with me show they can't be trusted."  I didn't know whatever past history the two of might have had.

My own preferred approach, when I can manage it, is to continue to act as if my good faith has not yet been exhausted, even when, privately, it has been exhausted.
 * Sometimes, occasionally, continuing to act as if I can still scrape up the assumption of good faith has got a bad faith contributor to return to acting in a good faith manner.
 * Responding in kind to other contributors' bad faith sets a bad example for other readers. I am not going to assume that, if I respond in kind, third parties can determine that the other guy started it, and I was provoked beyond reason.
 * Responding in kind to other contributors' provocations further poisons the atmosphere of collegiality we should all be trying to cultivate.

For the record I don't think I owe you or anyone any kind of apology for not challenging that other contributor.

For the record I don't think I owe you or anyone any kind of apology for reminding you that discussions are supposed to address content issues, not personalities.

Candidly, Geo Swan (talk) 23:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Smile!


Here's the Flatiron Building for you! The Flatiron Building somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Acalamari 02:10, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Attorneys General
Unfortunately, I'm not completely sure - my most likely assumption is that it's from Haydn's Book of Dignities (1894, or thereabouts). I'll try to check and see next time I'm at the library. john k (talk) 05:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

When is it appropriate....
To refactor another editors talk page? [] I have left a lvl 1 warning on this page for refactoring another users talk page that was clarly not vandalism. I have since been told that because I have a colorful history it is an invalid warning. I would like to have a few admin go and comment one way or another to this as I believe my actions were not only appropriate but very moderated. Thank You.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * the issue wasn't refactoring the talk pages, more so that an admin would be willing to flout the rules and when called on it make an excuse as flimsy as that in not accepting feedback. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * In attempting to give back info I may have clouded my issue. My issue in bold is

"I'll be ready to accept your warnings when you (a) learn to treat newcomers politely and (b) achieve an acceptable standard of literacy in your own work."

MY complaints are that in a clear cut issue of doing something she shouldn't have done the above reasons were used as her reason it was ok. If this is her reasons for something this small imagine if I gave feedback for something more serious (assuming it is valid) and a new user or another editor sees that and assumes just because a person had a rough start they can be ignored. Does that dlear it up? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * replied on my talk page.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hutton
We have an article that suggests (without references) that a Mr. Hutton of London gets so drunk that he has inspired a new form of dance and you honestly don't think that is vandalism or information about a real person that should be speedily deleted? There is no hutstep it is blatant misinformation and an attack on this Hutton fellow.Capitalismojo (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see that you do agree that it should be deleted. You just don't think that it rises to "hoax". I disagree but I'm sure it will de deleted either way. Capitalismojo (talk) 14:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am enormously clever in the morning after my coffee. Sorry for the annoying comments. Cheers!Capitalismojo (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Innit?
It's about time for another romp through hell, innit? (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 01:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Campbell Case
I'm about done with what I've got on the Campbell Case, have at it! I sort of blundered into it out of the Zinoviev letter — on which I still have more to add. It's easy to get sidetracked though, eh? Feel free to email me directly: MutantPop@aol.com /// best, —Tim Davenport /// Early American Marxism website /// Corvallis, OR (USA) Carrite (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a really big hole for the Incitement of Sedition Act of 1797, whatever that is formally called. I don't know if you have legal expertise, but that would be a very good addition, I know. Carrite (talk) 22:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyright Infringement
Please, Ironholds, thank you for notifying me of my grevious mistake on my user page. I am deeply embarassed to have done so, yet I assure you, it shall not happen again. I ask your forgiveness in my lateness in responding, as I have not been active here for some months, and I doubt still that I shall edit here greatly. Aidoflight (talk) 18:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Clerk of the Parliaments
Please check this edit: did I fix a typo, or did I make an error? If "not" was intended, could you please reword, since it seems somewhat of an awkward sentence? Nyttend (talk) 01:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Druanne White
An AfD on this article closed as no consensus in July, so it can't be prodded. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles
Hello Ironholds, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:
 * PROD removed from ARIA Music Awards of 2009, by User:Tristan 753, with summary '(Added more information)'
 * PROD removed from Law Week Colorado, by User:75.71.194.59, with summary '(no edit summary)'
 * PROD removed from State Bill Colorado, by User:75.71.194.59, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Regarding: Problem with Internal Link Syntax topic: Delete it.
Sorry. Delete it. That was supposed to go into the Wikipedia Village Pump. There was a page off the Wikipedia Village Pume Search that said it found no topics but you can create a new page. That's what I did. I thought it would be added to the Wikipedia Village Pump section. I don't know where it wound up or how it wound up there. But I'll try again tomorrow. GaryZ45RPM (talk) 22:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

RE:SAMP
Oh, blood heck... I have idea how that happened. My browser may have funned up and not sent the request properly, I guess. Thanks for letting me know! Cheers, Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  18:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Salt of the Earth (Texas In July EP) redirect
Hey, can we talk about the redirect you did at Salt of the Earth (Texas In July EP)? I feel that it does meet WP:MUSIC on grounds that it is an official, label release from a notable artist on a notable record label. So I guess my conclusion would be to fix it back to my last version, but I wanted to get your thoughts on the matter. Thanks. Green Runner  0  00:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * First off, that little bit on the talk page was debating a speedy deletion nomination by Estragons and it was my attempt at debating it with the tag, but the Speedy Del nom tag was removed by Jafeluv before the actual discussion took place, so that has no issue with you. In terms of WP:MUSIC, where does it say the EP automatically fail? Green  Runner  0  01:15, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, no problem, thanks for being civil about everything. Cheers! Green  Runner  0  01:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Freiwilligen
Hi

I am assuming that after I edited the page after your first [|"dictionary-definition copied from Wiktionary"] and I removed the banner (as it said I could) added all the text, links and refs that you were in some way still not sure it was "just a dicdef".

The latest takes it a step further with the AFD - I am a little confused as to why you are still treating it as DicDef.

The page collects the Freiwilligen usage not the Freiwillige definitions. It is a collection of divisions and forces within the German army during WW2.

What would convince you ? Chaosdruid (talk) 01:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * OK - thx for speedy reply btw lol thought it was old message to start with Chaosdruid (talk) 01:33, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Should I carry on discussing there ? I dont know if you will be notified of changes..Chaosdruid (talk) 01:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
A More Perfect Onion (talk) 12:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reporting that bug. I have fixed it, and there should be no more similar errors. Tim1357 (talk) 04:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)