User talk:Joe Decker/Archive 8

BLP PRODS
Is it possible that you could take a second step on future PROD's and add them to User:Ryan Vesey/sandbox 2 so I can source them? I'm working on listing the ones you tagged before this comment. Ryan Vesey 20:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC) Thanks Ryan. appreciate it. I think it would be best overall to try to organize a bot to add the exact urls and birthdates and would save a lot of time..♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, could you set Twinkle to create a PROD log and I could watch that? Ryan Vesey 20:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * To be specific, I'm only interested in the Olympics PRODS. Ryan Vesey 20:12, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Longer response in a few minutes.  --j⚛e deckertalk 20:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I've turned on CSD/PROD logging, which I should have done before. But if I run into any more, I can certainly let you know as well.  Since Dr. B's first message, I did one or two more but none of his, although I did add "BLP unsourced" to a few without a PROD.   I'll see if I can prepare a list of those outstanding for you, too.  Toolserver is too badly lagged to be of use, but I have an idea. --j⚛e deckertalk 20:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool and thanks. I'm sure if anything AWB could pull up your recent contributions and skip all articles not tagged with one of the tags. Ryan Vesey 20:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * NP. As near as I can tell, of the BLPPRODs I'd added in the last three days that refer to Olympic athletes, only three remained.  In two cases, the tags remained despite an editor having added a source, I've removed both tags.  (This is how most BLPPRODs play out, someone tags them, someone else adds a source, and order is restored in the universe.) The only remaining case, Dragoș Agache, I'll handle myself (least I can do), and again I'll try and notify you in the future.  I'm on MacOSX, and haven't set up a method of using Windows, so I think AWB is not available to me, but just searching my contributions for BLPPRODs, well, there just aren't that many of 'em.  --j⚛e deckertalk 20:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be ubercool. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Plastikspork said it would easily be done but doesn't have the time to do it. So the outcome of this depends on another bot coder accepting the challenge I guess.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Citation needed
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Citation needed. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Awesome, thanks! And yes, we are all here to building the most resourceful high quality encyclopedia which is supposed to be collaborative and fun, a lot of people do forget that. I understand that a lot of people though prefer to build us brick by brick rather than house by house if you understand me but I think most articles require the same amount of edits and works however they're started and all contribute to our ultimate goal. For me I guess it was more worrying that we as the "World's Best Encyclopedia" were missing half the competitors at the Olympics than worrying about how they might progress from stubs. Anyway, Plastikspork says coding a bot to add the urls and birth data would be quite easy but is too busy. Hopefully somebody can do it but its a nightmare finding people to run bots. Fritzpoll had the most potential but quit after hardship from the community in 2008. I've asked ThadeusB if he could do it but I have a feeling it might be some time before anybody will do it. In the meantime I can tackle a few daily. I did expand a few, Rambling Man created an article on a British sailor the other day which I expanded. But they all need a lot of work beyond the olympics, most of the bios are multi linked in their individual sport chamionships from past years but wikipedia in general needs a lot of work. But I'd rather the articles were seen as a useful start rather than causing problems, so if it is technically a BLP problem I want to get something sorted asap.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Fernando Cabrera-Deletion
Why?, he's not known in any English-language country, but in Spain he does. In fact he has a Filmography (altough isn't very extense), has too an imdb profile with his career and Eldoblaje.com is a profile of his works like dubbing actor. --Ravave (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Many editors consider IMDB (and I'm less sure about Eldoblaje) to not be a reliable source. The basic criteria for article inclusion at Wikipedia is the general notability guideline. What it asks is that articles be backed by multiple, reliable sources (generally newspapers, magazines, or books) that discuss the article subject in-depth. The idea is that the article, in the best of worlds, should be written from such sources.  I'd love to see additional references on this voice actor, and I will be happy to add them to the article and withdraw my nomination at AfD if some are presented.  Do you know of any that might be appropriate? Thanks!  --j⚛e deckertalk 15:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Is known in Spain, but how i say before, his filmography is too short and he's most known like dub actor. he only page that appear on the Web are forums, eldoblaje and the Imdb. Too bad!, if you want delete the article, go ahead. I will write again when find more information about him. --Ravave (talk) 15:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If there are newspaper articles, magazines, etc., in Spain, that's fine, but it sounds like maybe not?  But don't give up hope yet.  One of the reasons that there is a week-long discussion is that it gives other editors a chance to try and look for sources too.  I try, but I miss things sometimes, so we require a few editors to take a look at most deletions like this, and speaking personally, I'd much rather that someone found something.  --j⚛e deckertalk 15:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll try, long time ago was writting about a reporterwoman and a dubbing actress after to found their curriculums xDD. With luck, i could find the curriculum about this guy. --Ravave (talk) 15:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If you can find anything at all, let me know, even if it's after deletion, the article can be restored if sufficient new sources come to light. --j⚛e deckertalk 15:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Sami Selçuk

 * Hi! I added some sources about Sami Selçuk. Best regards.-- Reality 19:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi! I've added one more source and removed the deletion template.  Thank you so much!  --j⚛e deckertalk 19:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Prachi Save Sathi
The Prachi Save article was recreated after it was deleted via AfD. New article's name is Prachi Save Sathi. As you nominated it, could you take a look at it and see if it needs to be speedied. Bgwhite (talk) 08:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually,I'm going to change my mind here, could you poke the closing admin and have him make the call? Thanks!  --j⚛e deckertalk 04:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Have a well-deserved break!♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'm mostly gone another week, just busy, not travelling, sorry for the delay.  --j⚛e deckertalk 04:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

My RfA
I could've sworn I'd posted here previously thanking you for your participation in my recent RfA. I'm very interested now in developing a more informed perspective at AfD, and I think I'm going to give non-admin closures a shot in the near future. Shouldn't be too hard, and it'll help to clear out the backlogs &mdash; something I think Wikipedia certainly needs.

Take care. =) Kurtis (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'd be glad to talk more when I'm back next week, I'm having a "it never rains but it pours" month, apparently. Cheers!  --j⚛e deckertalk 04:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

an fyi on José Benítez
Just making sure you realize we have a confrontation once again at José Benítez during our open RFC. The rm happened but has no bearing on an open rfc on wikipeida policy. Two editors have now reverted HandsomeFella for removing information. Also in talking I thought we had an understanding of one change (which I did) and yet HandsomFella has changed it twice now. Just making sure it isn't a one way street. Have a good one. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've fully protected the article, and will give some pause before taking further action. --j⚛e deckertalk 00:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. And now I see an another ani has been started for your protection of the page. geez. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No prob. Unfortunately, I'm having a number of things pulling me away from WP in real life, and I'll be mostly absent through Aug. 27.  Best, --j⚛e deckertalk 04:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

New RfC
Joe, the RfC you started will tomorrow have run 30 days I think, and has got bogged down with domination by the writer of WP:TENNISNAMES. I think your wording was too diffuse to deal with a very specific set of problem edits, and encouraged a talking shop with would put off any editor in their right mind. Now that there's been opportunity for endless talk, I propose to replace it tomorrow with a new RfC on a simple yes/no question - following the conclusion of WP:TENNISNAMES RfC the 100 tennis ledes with ledes like "Mario Rincón (born 13 December 1967), known professionally as Mario Rincon, is a former professional tennis player from Colombia." be removed? Remove or keep? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh boy, I didn't see above :( In ictu oculi (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think, and I'm still on the road so I haven't had a chance to look through all of this blowing up during my wikibreak, that it'd probably be good at this point for an uninvolved admin to come and close the existing discussion first. Then whatever comes from that can come from that, and whatever needs to be done next can be done next. I do agree with your general criticisms of the RfC construction, however.  --j⚛e deckertalk 12:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure. Btw I didn't mean to be critical of the RfC construction; it would have been a perfectly sensible and logical structure in a sensible and logical environment. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries either way, I would certainly try and do it differently in the future. Unfortunately I'm going to be largely offline for another week.  Never rains, but it pours.  --j⚛e deckertalk 04:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Concerning Travis Rodgers
I have noted that you were the admin who deleted the page for Travis Rodgers about a year ago. I can understand that: there were no references. That being said, I am working on a new page for Travis Rodgers in my sandbox that will include references, and I would like a go-ahead from you. He is currently the host of a nationally broadcast radio talk show called "Travis Rodgers Now." He was previously a producer for The Jim Rome Show, but has left and gone out on his own. I believe a properly written article would be appropriate at this time. You can see I've written several articles in the past. The Saxon (talk) 06:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Go for it. I hope you don't mind that I converted the references over to use our footnote/reference mechanism.   Thanks!  --j⚛e deckertalk 16:36, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, don't mind at all. I was going to do so anyway, but I was just getting the basic info down in my sandbox to convert later.  If you're going to make my job easier for me, than I can only thank you for it. --The Saxon (talk) 16:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Have a great day!   --j⚛e deckertalk 17:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Family Research Council
You can unlock the page now if you want. Current wording looks to be fine with people and if it isn't, it'll be discussed anyway. Acoma Magic (talk) 04:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like things are focused back on the talk page, thanks for the note. --j⚛e deckertalk 05:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Umrani
Why the revert? I don't understand. It breaks what I fixed. -- WikHead (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Finger slip, I'll self-revert. Sorry!  --Joe Decker (alt) (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * LOL, okay I'm glad there was a good explanation, as it had me rather confused . -- WikHead (talk) 15:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I really need to find some CSS do dump rollback off my usual watchlist formatting. I can't turn off "rollback" as an admin, at least while logged-in, and I do use it in other contexts, but I never use it from my default watchlist.  Thanks for your good humor.  --j⚛e deckertalk 00:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)r
 * Oh, I don't use a watchlist so I almost missed this. You've brought up a very good point actually. It would be a very serious thing if users purposely used rollback without reviewing the diffs, so rollback buttons really have no business appearing in areas such as the watchlist. Perhaps there's an administrative reason why this would be helpful, but for the average rollbacker, I'd tend to support the removal of the buttons in these areas. Regardless, if you do happen to find a snipped of code that will do this, I would be interested in taking a look. Have yourself a great day Joe. Regards, -- WikHead (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Aha! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Customizing_watchlists#Remove_or_modify_the_.5Brollback.5D_link  --j⚛e deckertalk 16:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Joe! I've added this to my custom CSS. Though I haven't used my watchlist in well over two years, I often think of blanking the overwhelming 9000+ articles on it, and starting fresh. This snippet of CSS will indeed help keep things tidy and allow me to sneeze easy with mouse in hand. Stay well, and happy editing! -- WikHead (talk) 21:53, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, glad to have a solutionf or that myself! Have a great week! --j⚛e deckertalk 14:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

David Mackenzie
Hi Joe, you deleted the 'David Mackenzie (programmer)' page. Chances are when you deleted that page, several of his programs ran on the wikipedia server. Infact, he co-authored the command 'rm', used to delete a file, among other programs. The fact is this guys code is probably running on > 50% of webservers on the net doing essential tasks (whatever the number of gnu-linux servers are). I wanted to find out who this guy was, :-(

You can verify by going to any gnu-linux box and type 'man rm'. I think it qualifies as 'notable'. I'd like to read about this guy.

Rather curious, isn't it!


 * Howdy. First, you can sign your posts by adding --~ to them, that's our general habit here, it aids communication.
 * Second, if you've read the instructions provided when went to edit this page, you've already noticed that the article in question was deleted as a result of our proposed deletion process. As such, the article is eligible to be recreated on demand.  From your tone, I'm going to assume that you'd like the article restored, and I will happily do so a moment after I finish this reply.
 * Third, the article as it exists, once I restore it, will likely be sent to AfD for a deletion discussion unless it is improved by the addition of reliable sources. The article was marked as lacking such sources for around a year without improvement. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and the basic criteria for the inclusion of biographies of living people can be found at WP:BASIC, which I would recommend reading.  "Notable", for the purposes of Wikipedia, is pretty much defined by that policy--not my opinions, not yours. Once a couple reliable, secondary sources are added to the article which each provide in-depth coverage of this fellow, the criteria will have been clearly met and any future concerns about the article being deleted should be forestalled. I would expect that should be an easy improvement to manage.
 * Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia! --j⚛e deckertalk 16:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I have both restored the article, and notified the editor who requested deletion of the restoration. Please feel free to ask if I can explain anything further, our processes can be a bit confusing at times, and leave a poor impression.  I'll be glad to assist.  Best, --j⚛e deckertalk 16:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

John Travolta
Hi, see the article talk page. Any developments with the Olympic bio bot?♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I've started looking at the latter--the first thing I want to do is to see how big the problem is. I actually got, a few minutes ago, a little test code to work on the "detect concerning articles" part, and ran it on the archers sublist, which nets:  Le Chien-Ying, Tetyana Dorokhova, Kristine Esebua, Maja Jager, Kaori Kawanaka, Lidiia Sichenikova, Jessica Tomasi. Xu Jing (archer).  (Very surprised at how quickly I got that to run, fun to shake off the old rust.)  Once I've expanded this to get a complete list, I'll consider whether it's more painful to fix them all by hand or to code up the edits and undergo BRFA, and if I want to do the latter, how much automation and how much supervision will be required.  --j⚛e deckertalk 21:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, there's about 1300 biographies sourced only to london2012.com, plus another 500 which are entirely unreferenced. I can imagine that doing something with the first set is tractable and errorless enough that we could try and automatically dig up the appropriate athlete pages from the bios and just replace the URL or something.  Still be some work, and I'm guessing we can get consensus for that, although nothing is guaranteed about BRFA.  The 500 ... I doubt we'll get consensus to insert references without human eyeballs on 'em.  I'll probably try a BRFA on the 1300.  See User:Joe_Decker/Olympics.  There are a couple bits of broken in that list-- a couple articles on groups of athletes that shouldn't be in the cat, and my print routines choke on non-ASCII, but it gives you a sense of the problem.  NOREF means I didnt' find any http(s): type URLs in the article, BADREF means I found some but the all of the ones found were the london2012 toppage.  Is there any previous discussions about the suitability of this change that I should link if I file a BRFA?  I'm about as far as I can easily go without editing. --j⚛e deckertalk 05:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * See draft here. --j⚛e deckertalk 05:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I already see a problem, my code is missing iaaf name templates as refs. --j⚛e deckertalk 05:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks good, an olympic bot would be great.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:51, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool, we'll see how BRFA goes. I need to make sure that I show a community discussion on this before going there, I think you said you discussed this at Bot Requests, I'll peek there.  --j⚛e deckertalk 16:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Village pump discussion: --j⚛e deckertalk 17:23, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, sadly I'm stuck. I can not for the life of me get LWP::Simple to grab me the source of a query like http://www.london2012.com/search/index.htmx?q=Maja+Jager from london2012.com.  It has no trouble pulling stuff from other sites, I suspect the user-agent is being blocked or something.  Hmm.  --j⚛e deckertalk 21:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried LWP::UserAgent, which allows me to set the user agent string, and I'm still getting back some sort of "permission denied" from the Olympics site. If I can't automatically traverse that site..... --j⚛e deckertalk 23:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Official names
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Official names. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Undeleting Lakireddy Bali Reddy
Hi, I noticed that the article on Lakireddy Bali Reddy was recently deleted in a stunningly bad AFD process, and I'd like your help in reinstating the article.


 * User:Chimino said in the AFD that the case Reddy case "was a local and not national or international news story." This is plainly disproved, as the case was covered both in India (e.g. Indian Express) and the US (e.g. Los Angeles Times), and by international news services (e.g. Agence France-Presse (AFP))
 * The Lakireddy Bali Reddy case was a landmark incident in the history of American sex trafficking. This is why a simple Google Books search shows his name mentioned in 155 books; also see this article, "How Lakireddy Case Spurred California Sex Trafficking Laws"
 * A simple Google Scholar search shows his name mentioned in at least 38 academic papers and reports
 * And Lakireddy Bali Reddy isn't known for only one incident — a Google News search shows two articles (1, 2) mentioning Reddy just this month!

Thanks in advance for your help!

--Anirvan (talk) 01:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * First, I do think that, while you've employed a shotgun rather than a rifle in your analysis of sources here, you make an excellent case for the notability of the sex trafficking case. I would have few qualms about an event article focused on such. Note that I closed the AfD with specific reference to the BLP1E policy, which specifically relates to an article on Reddy, not "the Reddy case."
 * Does the evidence really suggest notability for the individual beyond that case? Yes and no, I have mixed feelings about that question. The two articles you close with from The Hindu never mention the person, they mention in passing a college named for the person, which is on the face of it a "no".....  save that the existence of such a column provides a suggestion that the fellow might not be "low profile."  Having a college named after oneself is not, however, an automatic route to notability.  As such, I'm not willing to restore the old biographical article as a biography without further community discussion.  BLP1E is still a potentially valid outcome here, and your new evidence on the specifics of a biographical article isn't overriding. As a result, any change is community's call to make, not my own.  No qualms with the article being taken to DRV, however, and I'll likely stand neutral in that DRV barring further evidence. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I went ahead and posted this to deletion review. --Anirvan (talk) 18:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks for the notification! --j⚛e deckertalk 18:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Rev.M.J.Prakash
You recently restored the PROD tag for this article but I believe the better option would be to take it to AfD. SwisterTwister  talk  22:08, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm good with that, and will make it so. If you would, please keep an eye to see that the editor involved doesn't delete the AfD notice?  Thanks for the suggestion.  --j⚛e deckertalk 22:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Absolutely! However, I believe reliable sources may not be English, considering that the subject is from India. SwisterTwister   talk  22:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Indeed, one of the reasons I'm more than happy to get more eyes on the problem. Cheers!  --j⚛e deckertalk 22:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! --j⚛e deckertalk 15:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Gali Muddu Krishnama Naidu
On this page you re-added a source that had been removed. Gyan Publishing is not a WP:RS as it appears on WP:MF. I have removed this source again and added a tag. Please review the Mirrors and Forks page which says clearly: "Mirrors and forks are not reliable sources and may not be listed as external links in articles." Please do not re-add the Gyan Publishing source. Thank you. JanetteDoe (talk) 21:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that was silly of me. When I'm back home, I'll look further, try and see if something more RS can be added, and if not, send toward AFD.  Thank you for the explanation. --Joe Decker (alt) (talk) 21:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Would you please

 * Hi Decker, though article Nandini Sahu has been deleted, in this regard I am doubtful and have some concerns. I do not want to reveal that but voting only by editors from (or belong to) that part of the world, does not satisfy me. sources and notability, I understand and describe in different concept. I do not go in the details, but is it possible, the deleted article of Nandini Sahu can be redirected to my user page to further work on it. Actually I am not creator of the subject and I do not believe low and high class system any where in the world, though that exists. A word to the wise. Thanks. Justice007 (talk) 21:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Justice007. I am having a little trouble understanding what you're saying here, but I think I get the primary point, that you're bothered by the deletion of Nandini Sahu.  I've looked at the sources and article you've presented, and I believe that given the information I was presented, I made the only decision that discussion allowed.  It seems likely that the most reliable source you presented is actually not about the article subject at all, a point made by multiple editors in the discussion which you didn't make any rebuttal to.  It may be that we should have an article on Nandini Sahu, but with the sources you've presented otherwise, I believe that the contributing editors have made a plausible argument otherwise, and that it would take additional sources, not by Sahu but about Sahu, from unquestionably reliable sources such as mainstream newspapers and such, for me to override their WP:CONSENSUS.  --j⚛e deckertalk 00:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

My accessment
 * I am realy still not satisfy even your clarity about reliable sources, I ask my apologizes that I am going to mention some text of the policy here, that you already know it.

"The word "source" as used on Wikipedia has three related meanings: the piece of work itself (the article, book), the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press)".

"Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people".

"Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. The following examples cover only some of the possible types of reliable sources and source reliability issues, and are not intended to be exhaustive. Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process". The term "published" is most commonly associated with text materials, either in traditional printed format or online.

"Reliable non-academic sources may also be used in articles about scholarly issues, particularly material from high-quality mainstream publications. Deciding which sources are appropriate depends on context. Material should be attributed in-text where sources disagree".

"When taking information from opinion content, the identity of the author may help determine reliability. The opinions of specialists and recognized experts are more likely to be reliable and to reflect a significant viewpoint.[2] If the statement is not authoritative, attribute the opinion to the author in the text of the article and do not represent it as fact. Reviews for books, movies, art, etc. can be opinion, summary or scholarly pieces".


 * Now lets access and assess the sources that I had provided for the notability of the subject were dismissed by just the voting by same chain editors?!!.

Merinews 1 Articles written by Dr. Ratan Bhattacharjee this and this too. This online newspaper has full editorial board with hold and control. Is that not third party, not reliable source, because it is published from India, and by Indian youth talent?!!!.


 * Studies in women writers in English edited by Mohit K.Ray and Rama Kundo, they write in preface, not third party?, academic writers?. And take a look at

Isahitya written by admin Reviewed by Prof.G S Jolly written by admin and here is the editor and team also not third party and reliable?.

All about book publishing Dr. Nandini's interview by GS Jolly (GSJ), deputy editor of AABP,and look that publication's editorial board, not third party, reliable, because that is not in Europe as Random House or Cambridge University Press run by native speakers of English??!!. All that sources are about Sahu but not by Sahu, what you stated above. Please tell me what are other reliable sources than that??. Thanks for giving your time.Justice007 (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Justice007, I'll look more into this tomorrow, between you and the other editor below, there's quite a bit to go through.  In the meantime, I urge you to reread WP:BASIC and WP:IRS carefully.  Thank you!  --j⚛e deckertalk 06:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Please see my response to "Undeleting Nandini Sahu" below, as it is addressed to both of you.
 * A few specific points: Merinews is not reliable, it appears to contain republished press releases.  I'm less certain of isahitya, I'd like you get a ruling from WP:RSN before using that source.  I do believe that it's possible now to recreate the article, and I go into this further in the "Undeleting Nandini Sahu" section below.  Best of luck. --j⚛e deckertalk 02:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Your response encourages the new comers and reliability and neutrality of wikipedia, I personally appreciate your move and opinion, first I will ask at WP:RSN, then try to rewrite the article. Thanks for your time to access the sources and assisting me. Justice007 (talk) 08:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Undeleting Nandini Sahu
I have been going through the discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nandini_Sahu) and it amuses me that the administrator Joe Decker assumes there can be only one Nandini Sahu. If someone made a wrong referencing to the TOI article, then it should not be treated as a judgment for deciding the authenticity of the page. The correct referencing to the TOI article is (http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Search&Key=TOIH/2011/01/24/32/Ar03201.xml&CollName=TOI_HYDERABAD_ARCHIVE_2009&DOCID=269529&Keyword=(%3Cmany%3E%3Cstem%3Enandini%3Cand%3E%3Cmany%3E%3Cstem%3Esahu)&skin=pastissues2&AppName=2&ViewMode=HTML). A few other online references to the subjest are as under :

1) http://www.worldofmanojdas.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=286:on-folk-in-modern-indian-literature&catid=54:interviewcat&Itemid=132

2) http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Writers&WriterID=941

3) http://www.isahitya.com/index.php/english-sahitya/467-secrecy-of-being-a-poet-a-conversation-with-nandini-sahu

4) http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=PoemArticle&PoemArticleID=97

In continuation to the references to the literary work of the subject, please find the below list which are articles in hard copy (might be non-online) :

•	“A Symphony For Shanta”, B.Venkateswara Rao, Hayathanagar. Reviewed By Nandini Sahu, Poetcrit, Maranda, July 1999.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Spring Time”, I. P. Deepti, Bangalore, Reviewed By Nandini Sahu, Poetcrit, Maranda, July 1999. (REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“ Myth as Revelation: A Study in the Poetry of W.B.Yeats”, The Scoria, Chandigarh, May 2001.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Kaleidoscope of the Indian Society-The Voice of Indo-Anglian Women Poets”, The Scoria, Chandigarh, March 2001.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Big Things & Small Things in Arundhati Roy’s The God Of Small Things”, Indian Book Chronicle, Jaipur, July, 2001.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Will”, K.B.Rai, Berhampur, Reviewed By Nandini Sahu & Padmini Sahu, Poetcrit, Maranda, July 2000.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Feminism: Opposing the Binary Opposition”, Pakistan Journal of American Studies, Vol-19, Spring and Fall 2001, Nos 1 & 2, Islamabad, Pakistan.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Rasa, Dhvani & Auchitya in the Indian & Western Poetics”, Modern Literary Criticism, Authors Press, New Delhi 2003.(EDITED BOOK) •	“Love Poems: The Historical Alternative---Poems of Sylvia Plath and Kamala Das”, The Atlantic Critical Review, Volume 2, Number 2, New Delhi, India.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Rethinking Modernity, Rereading T.S.Eliot”, The Atlantic Critical Review, April-June 2004, Vol 3, No 2, New Delhi, India.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Academics of Teaching-Literary Theory and Practice”, Creative Writing and Criticism, Vol 2, No 1, October 2004.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Wild Urge of a Man on Earth to Touch the Heaven---The Extra-Literary Vision of Mulk Raj Anand”, Asian Quarterly, June- July 2005.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Nostalgic Note in their Flute: A Reading of Arundhati Roy and Jhumpa Lahiri”, Indian Writings in English, Atlantic Publishers & Distributors, New Delhi, 2006.(EDITED BOOK) •	“Shakespearean Heroines: The Source of Energy and Vitality”, The Atlantic Critical Review, January –March, New Delhi, 2006.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Chemistry Behind Creativity: A Reading of Sylvia Plath and Ted Huges”, Creative  Writing And Criticism, Sikandrabad, (U.P.) April, 2006.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Poetry for Life’s Sake: Voice of Judith Wright”, Explorations in Australian Literature, Sarup & Sons, New Delhi ,2006.(EDITED  BOOK) •	“Mother And Other Poems by –Pashupati Jha” Reviewed by Nandini Sahu, Indian Book Chronicle, Jaipur, July, 2006.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Emerging Innovations in Technology and Pedagogy” Indian Book Chronicle, March 2006, Vivek Trust Publication, Jaipur, 2006.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“The Concept of Love in Shakespearean Sonnets: A Study”, Creative Writing and Criticism, October, 2006, Sikandarabad, UP.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	“Religious Harmony and Political Cosmos: the Voice of T. S. Eliot; Ripples, Vol-I, Sep.2006 – Feb.2007.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Folk and Tribal Culture of Orissa: Religiosity, Historicity and Oral Traditions; Tribes of India: Identity, Culture and Lore; Angik Prakashan, Guwahati, 2007.(EDITED BOOK) •	The Position of Women in Oriya Literature: www.boloji.com; 16th Oct 2007. •	Gurudev Tagore; The Visionary with a Mission; www.bolokids.com; 23rd Oct 2007. •	Valmiki : January 5, 2008; www.bolokids.com •	Panini: 10th February 2008; www.bolokids.com •	Two Dispossessed Habitats: A Study of Jhumpa Lahiri’s Interpreter of Maladies and The Namesake, 17th February 2008; www.boloji.com •	Double Colonization for the Marginalized Children A Literary Delineation, 3rd March, 2008; www.boloji.com •	The Cultural Designation of Feminism: Theory and Praxis,18th March 2008, www.boloji.com •	Santh Kabir, 3rd May 2008; www.bolokids.com •	Need and Strategy for Capacity Building through Communicative Skills in Open Distance Learning – Indian Journal of Open Learning (IGNOU), Vol. 17, November 1, Jan 2008.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Translation as Power; Dialogue,Vol-IV,No-1, 2008, Lucknow, India.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Two Dispossessed Habitats: A Study of Jhumpa Lahiri’s Interpreter of Maladies and The Namesake. The Atlantic Literary Review, October-December 2008, Vol. 9, No. 4.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	The Cultural Designation of Feminism: Theory and Praxis, New Urges in Post Colonial Literature: Widening Horizons;Atlantic Publishers and Distributors; 2009. •	Words and Silences in the Poetry of Niranjan Mohanty ; Poesie India International, Vol 44,2009.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	The Cultural Designation of Feminism: Theory and Praxis, PARNASSUS:An Innovative Journal of Literary Criticism;Vol.I,2009.(REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Gerard Manley Hopkins: The Poet and the Priest: A Study of The Windhover, New Perspectives in British Literature, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors (P) Ltd., 2010 (EDITED BOOK) •	Double Colonization for the Marginalized Children A Literary Delineation, Surviving Against Odds: the marginalized in a globalizing world, Ed. D.K SinghaRoy,Monohar Publications.2010. (EDITED BOOK) •	Nationalism through Patriotic Books; All About Book Publishing, Aug-Sept 2010. (REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Winds of Change: The Voice of Judith Wright and Kamala Das, ;The Atlantic Critical Review, April-June 2010, Volume -9, Number-2. (REFEREED JOURNAL) •	Nandini Sahu in Conversation with Manoj Das, published in www.worldofmanojdas.in; 04.102011 (http://www.worldofmanojdas.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=286:on-folk-in-modern-indian-literature&catid=54:interviewcat&Itemid=132) •	Nandini Sahu interviewed by G.S. Jolly, All About Book Publishing,  Vol: II, Issue- VI, December 2011-January2012 •	The Shadow of a Shadow, short story by Nandini Sahu in www.isahitya.com March, 2012 •	Legitimacy and Homogeneity of Cross-Cultural Experiences—a study on ‘Language Death’, Folklore and the alternative Modernities, Vol.I, Authorspress, 2012(EDITED BOOK) •	Gopinath Mohanty’s  ‘PARAJA’:  A Study of the  Folk Culture  of  Orissa, Folklore and the alternative Modernities, Vol.I, Authorspress, 2012(EDITED BOOK) •	 Documentation within History—A Study on Language Death; Creative Writing and Criticism, Volume 9 Number 2 April 2012 •	Children’s Literature: Text and Context,  The Atlantic Critical Review 11:1 (Jan-March 2012). •	http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=PoemArticle&PoemArticleID=97 (Nandini Sahu in Conversation with S.K.Padhy, August 2012) •	The Wild Stream, Short Story by Nandini Sahu, Rock Pebbles, June 2012

P O E M S About 200 poems published in books/journals in India (from 1995 to 2010) (in Indian Literature from Sahitya Akademi, The Quest, New Quest, Kavya Bharati,Scoria,Poetcrit, etc.) and in USA ,UK and Pakistan. o	Sabata Basanta; Adhunika, Odia bi-annual journal, Spring, 2011 o	Odisha Landscape, Transfire, a literary Quarterly for Translation, Oct-Dec 2011 o	Haiku by Nandini Sahu, Indian Book Chronicle, Jaipur, December 2011 o	Sabda, Katha Katha, Kavita Kavita,Odisha,  December 2011 o	Smritira Nirvana,Dhvani-Pratidhvani, 25th March 2012 o	Bridge-in-Making, Syndic Literary Journal, California, No.6, April , 2012. o	Two poems, Rock Pebbles, January 2012 o	Freedom, Indian Book Chronicle,37:4, April 2012 o	Chahala Samaya, Nabaneeta, April-June,2012 o	http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Poem&PoemID=12388 (poem In the Andamans, August, 2012)

BOOKS

i)	Recollection as Redemption, Authors Press, New Delhi, 2004.

ii)	The Other Voice, A Collection of Poems, Authors Press, New Delhi, 2004.

iii)	The Silence, A Collection of Poems, Authors Press, New Delhi, 2005.

iv)	Post Modernist Delegations in English Language Teaching: The Quixotic Deluge, (Ed: Dr Nandini Sahu)Authors Press, New Delhi, 2005.

v)	The Post Colonial Space: Writing the Self and The Nation, (Ed: Dr Nandini Sahu) Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, 2007 vi)	Silver Poems on My Lips, A Collection of Poems, Authors Press, New Delhi, 2009. vii) Folklore and the Alternative Modernities(Vol. I), Authorspress, New Delhi, 2012. vii)	Folklore and the Alternative Modernities(Vol. II), Authorspress, New Delhi, 2012

I think on the account of the above references, the administrator should undelete the page.


 * Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, you appear to be new here.  In general, after making a comment on a talk page, sign it by adding --~ after your comment, which should add your signature and the date and time.
 * You seem to have misunderstood one thing very badly--I did not delete the article because someone suggested one inappropriate reference. I deleted it because of all the editors involved, most felt the references provided did not meet the notability requirements of WP:BASIC, supported by references (please read WP:IRS.  Put another way, the problem wasn't one bad reference.  It was a lack of good ones.
 * There do appear to be some promising references in what you've written, but much of what you've provided is work *by* Sahu, rather than *about* Sahu, and WP:BASIC very very clearly requires the latter, not the former. (If that's not clear to you, let me know and I'll explain further.)
 * I hope to have more time to look through the avalanche of information you and Justice007 have provided tomorrow.  In the meantime, I urge you both to read and understand WP:BASIC and WP:IRS carefully.  Thank you!  --j⚛e deckertalk 06:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I've looked through the list of references you and Justice007 have provided, and I have to admit it's fairly dizzying. However, I do see a couple articles, one of which I found doing my own research, one of which Justice007 provided, which were not considered during the discussion, and which do meet our standards.  One was the Education Times article that Justice007 gave me a temporary link to (I can't read it now, but it was a solid article on Sahu), and a 14-page article about her (AGAIN, NOT *BY* her, but ABOUT her) here.  iSahtiya, I'd ask you to get its reliability assessed with a question at WP:RSN, it looks awfully promotional to me, but it still might be a valid source.
 * Unfortunately, while I believe notability has been demonstrated, in my research I found that most of the article was originally based on a copyright violation of another article on the web dated 2009, our article was created in 2011. As a result, the article will have to be rebuilt in a non-copyrighted form, rather than undeleted and fixed up.  I strongly recommend that you do this in your user space as a userspace draft, and that you made use of the Education Times article that Justice007 provided and the Seclusion/Atlantic literary review source.  Please write primarily from what the sources say, NOT write based on your own personal knowledge, although of course you can use your knowledge to help find additional sources to verify things you know to be true. Create this at User:Justice007/Nandini Sahu or the like. Once you (either or both of you) put something together that is originally written) and based on a better understanding of Wikipedia's sourcing and notability guidelines, I would be very glad to make sure that that article is included in Wikipedia.  --j⚛e deckertalk 02:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

One question added after your vote
Thanks much for voting. When we put the RfC together, one thing we were all agreed on was that it should run a week, so that it didn't take too much time away from more central questions ... but we decided not to put that in the RfC, I think because we didn't want to force a cutoff in the middle of a good debate. At this point, I've added that question, if you'd like to vote on that one too. - Dank (push to talk) 13:29, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Done! --j⚛e deckertalk 16:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

De-defunct?
You're invited over to WT:URBLP. --Lexein (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ --j⚛e deckertalk 19:13, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Michael Heath (Paralympic swimmer)
Wow, that was fast. Dloh cierekim  22:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to help, 'twas nothing much. :)  --j⚛e deckertalk 22:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * :) --j⚛e deckertalk 23:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Linda Hudson
Hi Joe, I am the digital communications director for BAE Systems, Inc., the company of which Linda Hudson is CEO. There are some recent changes to her bio, such as her just-announced addition to the Bank of America board of directors. While I can cite all the information and the changes are non-controversial, I didn't want to make any updates myself because of my organizational COI. I noticed you had previously made some minor edits to her page; would you consider reviewing the new information about her that I added to that article's talk page and making amendments? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! --Fieldsteven (talk) 19:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Fieldsteven. The biggest concern that will probably come up with that addition is that it's taken word-for-word, I'm guessing, from Hudson's bio and that that's been used before (e..g, http://www.eng.ufl.edu/reunion2012/keynote-speakers-panelists/),, and the issue there is that this wil lead to concerns about copyright.  Because everything added to Wikipedia is (as it says at the bottom of our editing boxes) licensed CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL, which is incompatible with anyone else ever having potentially claimed copyright on the text.  These licenses require that third-parties be able to use the text, not just Wikipedia, so it's not quite sufficient, as i understand it, to license the text for Wikipedia's use.  More information is here, which explains the process of verifying that you're the owner of any copyright there and you understand and consent to these licenses, otherwise, I"ll have to remove the material and we'd have to start there from scratch.  Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 13:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to comment at Monty Hall problem RfC
You are invited to comment on the following Mathematics-related RfC:

Talk:Monty Hall problem

--Guy Macon (talk) 07:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh my! --j⚛e deckertalk 14:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced "alleged Nazi war criminals" are probably an issue, yes?:
Hi Joe, Just letting you know there have been a few responses to your query at the Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard from 21 July. (I went there to try and 'stir' things up after my query went un-answered for 10 weeks!) - 220  of  Borg 12:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying, that was a situation, if I recall correctly (and I may not), where the material had been adequately sourced and then, later, the references removed -- restoring them is in such cases a significantly more sensible solution than removing them--otherwise removing references would be a great way to source anything. Most allegations woud receive even more scrutiny, but the Simon Wiesenthal Center's views aren't typically characterized as gossip.  Still, yes, if you have any concerns at all, break out the editing knives.  I'll take a look at your note over at BLPN too.  Thanks for the note.  --j⚛e deckertalk 13:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, interesting, apparently I'd walked by that and not caught it the first time I was at the article, and then fixed it later? How very strange.  --j⚛e deckertalk 13:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Flags and Same-sex marriage legislation around the world
Could you give your opinion here? Ron 1987 (talk) 12:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 14:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 04:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation update
Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice! --j⚛e deckertalk 21:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage legislation around the world
Could you give your opinion about this edit here? Ron 1987 (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 21:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Move a page
Could you/would you move Untitled Star Trek sequel to it's new title Star Trek Into Darkness, pretty please with sugar on top? It's a never ending battle between people about what's reliable and what's not, just put an end to it. xx Lady Lotus (talk) 02:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to take a look at the discussion, etc. once I'm back at a real computer, not going to try and deal with any edit war from a phone. :). --Joe Decker (alt) (talk) 02:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Understandable, your eyes might pop out of your head doing that all from a phone lol ;) Thanks for your assistance though. Seeing as how you are an admin, would you allow me to move the page myself with your blessing or no? Lady Lotus (talk)
 * Actually, no, but I have commented there, I expect we'll get this resolved shortly, warring won't solve anything, and there's no hurry. The requested move process will work its magic soon enough, and it's expected of me as an admin that I don't go barging in and overriding standard community processes without an overriding reason. Thanks for your patience, if there's ever anything else adminny I can do for you, please feel free to call on me.  --j⚛e deckertalk 12:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * :D Thanks :)   --j⚛e deckertalk 21:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 22:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Backup for Karamjit Dhuri
Hello! Found you deleted Karamjit Dhuri being unsourced. Can you please provide me the last (deleted) revision of the same. I want to improve it, whats lacks. Thanks! --tari buttar (talk) 02:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * -- userfied to User:TariButtar/Karamjit Dhuri, thanks! --j⚛e deckertalk 05:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal 1, Proposal 2 or Niether?
Hi! On the [Talk:Monty Hall problem RfC, would you be so kind as to put Proposal 1, Proposal 2 or Neither' at the start of your comments? We want to make things easy for the closing admin to count. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 15:14, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * --j⚛e deckertalk 16:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * --j⚛e deckertalk 16:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dolphin ( t ) 08:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Commented, thanks! --j⚛e deckertalk 13:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Corbett national park tour
I guess we were both working on this at the same time. I created the page and then you created a second nomination. So now there are two nominations. The IP had created the page at AFC so I moved that one to the right name (after a couple of tries) So yours should probably be deleted. GB fan 20:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoops! I saw that, assumed I'd incompletely cleaned up his efforts when I filed it, and tried to correct the problem the other way!   Yikes.  Hmmm.  How would you prefer this get fixed?.. I'm happy to apply some brute force to fixing this, but I don't want to overwrite your efforts. I'll stand down until I hear back. --j⚛e deckertalk 20:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think we should have a second nomination without a first nomination, so probably delete yours and point everything to the 1st nomination. GB fan 20:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll get mine deleted, if you'll help me fix things back up. Thanks. --j⚛e deckertalk 20:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, it looks like most of the knots are untangled, did I miss anything else? --j⚛e deckertalk 20:37, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I think between the two of we got it straightened out. GB fan 20:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * *laughs* Awesome.  Again, my apologies for stepping all over your toes there.  Have a great day!  --j⚛e deckertalk 20:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, maybe it was me stepping on your toes. You have a great day also.  GB fan 20:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email! If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia). Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
 * 2) Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code.  Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
 * 3) Create your account by entering the requested information.  (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
 * 4) You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID.  (The account is now active for 1 year).
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
 * Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
 * Show off your Questia access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.


 * Thanks, Mr. Bot! --j⚛e deckertalk 15:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 15:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

AFDs

 * Thanks for your note; I had read the articles and have serious doubts as to their notability - despite the howls from the LBGT brigade. Lots of sources don't equal notability. I am surprised that you note one afd as being other than in good faith. The purpose of afd's is to allow due process. If the community wants to keep the articles that's fine with me. Enjoy your wikibreak.  Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!}  (Whisper...) 08:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, it was the series I objected to most, although your misrepresentation of the facts of the case in that particular AfD was off-putting as well. I would hope that four "procedurally close as not good faith" votes would suggest that there might be a problem to you, but I'm more concerned about the series of deletions and their disruptive effects.
 * To cut to the central issue, at a minute or so per nomination without automation, there clearly wasn't much time to even read the longer articles, and using "alleged" where "convicted" was in evidence was either intentionally misrepresenting the case, or a mistake caused by the speed with which you were working. That's not a matter of policy, it's a matter of lying or sloppiness.  I choose to believe the kinder interpretation.
 * This series of deletions had disruptive effects. The flood of nominations and further discussion on TerranceDC's talk page is arguably evidence enough, given community concerns about editor retention.
 * As I'm sure you know, it is general practice and precedent to avoid submitting more than a handful of AfDs on related topics at a time, doing so can overwhelm affected editors, the process, and is often seen as disruptive, as it tends to unnecessarily drive away potentially constructive editors and fuels divisiveness, as we see in the discussions that resulted here and probably here.
 * What really brought this to my attention, however, was Rebecca Wight. (Which should be the Murder of Rebecca Wight, but nevermind that for a moment.)  I find it quite difficult to believe that you read an article about a person who'd had two entire books written about her and considered that non-notable with the eloquent argument of "A sad tale but fails notability test".  Which notability test?   WP:GNG? Share with me your wisdom.  Explain how you reach that result.  Because if *I* had such a minority view of notability that I could argue Wight was non-notable, I would surely at least attempt to explain my reasoning, and you haven't.  At best, it's WP:IDONTLIKEIT, or not noticing what the article said. At best.
 * Seriously, make your argument for Wight! Prove me wrong!  No new evidence for notability has been presented there, the otherwise unanimous arguments for keep are all proceeding directly from essentially the article you nominated.  Show me your reasoning, by defending your view at the AfD.
 * Barring that, if that highly dubious claim of a yet unspecified argument against notability in the Wight and other cases, and your ad hominum ("LGBT brigade") is all you have by way of defense, I'd say my evaluation of your series of nominations as disruptive seems sadly on-target, particularly given that I have pointed out the resulting disruption.  I've closed a number of AfD's in the past you've contributed to, and I know you're capable of good work here, so, I sincerely hope in the future you'll take my concerns about editor retention, and disruptive unbundled AfD discussions to heart, no matter what your personal feelings about the LGBT or any other wikiproject might entail.
 * Thanks for the kind wishes about my Iceland excursion tomorrow! Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 16:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment moved from above
Meet Joe Decker, deleter of valuable articles. (unsigned comment from 76.202.222.91)


 * If you let me know which article you are talking about, I'd be happy to discuss it! --j⚛e deckertalk 23:35, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter
Hey. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Please help/comment/help in Buyer's Remorse
Hello. I'm part of a group of students from Cornell University and we're planning on expanding the article Buyer's Remorse. I noticed that you protected the article. We're learning about Wikipedia and trying to expand an article. We're incrementally adding content to the article. Please help us out/comment/give us advice in any way you can. Thank you! Hela47 (talk) 21:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Hela47,
 * Thanks for the note, and for working to improve Wikipedia! First, I wanted to offer, while the very limited "semi-protection" on the article shouldn't be too much of a challenge (10 edits and four days), if some of the folks you're working with are being hampered by the protection let me know and I'll revise it or help mark the editors involved as confirmed.  The primary issue has been people adding links to things such as the newer Star Wars movies, and if there are a number of people working on the article constructively it may very well be appropriate to remove the protection.
 * I'm just back from Iceland and heavily jet-lagged, but your first improvements to the article seem constructive and referenced. I'm a little concerned that some elements (the full table, for example), might or might not go past what we expect in terms of detail/summary style, but you shouldn't take too much from that quick impression given my mental state right now!  You might be able to get some more thoughtful comments on the cognitive dissonance material by leaving a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology.  Hope this helps!  --j⚛e deckertalk 11:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Protection
Hi, looks like my request here to protect my old user name somehow caused my new user name to be protected also. Can you put User:CTF83! back to just semi-protect? Thanks, C T F 8 3 !  00:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ You got it!   --j⚛e deckertalk 01:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 16:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

User edit count - deleted articles
Thanks again for re-starting Ted Allbeury. My user edit count says I have four deleted edits. Can you find out what these edits were and on which page(s)? - Fanthrillers (talk) 22:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure! There's a link on your contributions page up near the top, it links here, which should show you your four edits. Hope this helps!  --j⚛e deckertalk 23:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't access it. I get the following message
 * Unable to proceed
 * The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Administrators, Oversighters, Researchers, Checkusers, afttest-hide.
 * -Fanthrillers (talk) 23:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Whoops, my bad. I've sent you an email with the listing, there's nothing that needs to be secret from you there.  Sorry about that! --j⚛e deckertalk 23:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I remember all four. - Fanthrillers (talk) 00:40, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter - closing up!
Hey all :).

We're (very shortly) closing down this development cycle for Page Curation. It's genuinely been a pleasure to talk with you all and build software that is so close to my own heart, and also so effective. The current backlog is 9 days, and I've never seen it that low before.

However! Closing up shop does not mean not making any improvements. First-off, this is your last chance to give us a poke about unresolved bugs or report new ones on the talkpage. If something's going wrong, we want to know about it :). Second, we'll hopefully be taking another pass over the software next year. If you've got ideas for features Page Curation doesn't currently have, stick them here.

Again, it's been an honour. Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Plz...
please move user:Kanghuitari -> Burkely Duffield plz :) Thank You. Kanghuitari (talk) 01:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Would you be willing to first add references to reliable sources, or at least *one* such reference, verifying the information in the article first, as requested by our biography of living people policy? Issues relating to the lack of such sources have caused articles on Duffield to be deleted six times at this point.  It seems to me that it would be better to avoid having to go through that process a seventh time.  It may also be helpful to read External links/Perennial websites first.  Then I'll be delighted to move it for you.  Please let me know if I can be of any assistance. Thanks!  --j⚛e deckertalk 01:54, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I add reference :) He is quite notabilty. Kanghuitari (talk) 02:35, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thanks!  I really appreciate it!  --j⚛e deckertalk 16:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Naila Nazir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hijacking (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

This is not a newsletter
This is just a tribute.

Anyway. You're getting this note because you've participated in discussion and/or asked for updates to either the Article Feedback Tool or Page Curation. This isn't about either of those things, I'm afraid ;p. We've recently started working on yet another project: Echo, a notifications system to augment the watchlist. There's not much information at the moment, because we're still working out the scope and the concepts, but if you're interested in further updates you can sign up here.

In addition, we'll be holding an office hours session at 21:00 UTC on Wednesday, 14 November in #wikimedia-office - hope to see you all there :). I appreciate it's an annoying time for non-Europeans: if you're interested in chatting about the project but can't make it, give me a shout and I can set up another session if there's enough interest in one particular timezone or a skype call if there isn't. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

City of the Sun (intentional community)

 * 03:40, 17 April 2011 Joe Decker (talk | contribs) deleted page City of the Sun (intentional community) (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable community. No apparent [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=cWM&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=%22City%20of%20the%20Sun%22%20columbus%20&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&t)
 * 23:04, 10 August 2007 MastCell (talk | contribs) deleted page City of the Sun (intentional community) (Deleting page - reason was: "solely primary referenced community/corporation- questionable notoriety (outdated prod)" using NPWatcher)

Hello. I would like to request a copy of the content that was deleted by you in 2011 and I would like to know who prodded it. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 01:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem, I'll drop the content in an email, the PROD was placed by User:Fang Aili.  --j⚛e deckertalk 02:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your quick reply. If I can be of any help with anything, let me know. Thanks again. Viriditas (talk) 03:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Anytime! --j⚛e deckertalk 17:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Once more...
May I ask you one more time? My user page move to Dan Benson. Thank you. :) Kanghuitari (talk) 20:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have, but have some concerns, I don't see a clear sign that the actor meets our notability guidelines, either WP:GNG or WP:ENT. Can you tell me which you believe he meets, and based on what sources?  Also, the New York Times article you used as a reference doesn't appear to mention him at all: am I missing something?  --j⚛e deckertalk 17:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Adam Howden
The Howden article was re-created after your AfD nomination. I noticed nobody participated in the AfD, thus I didn't want to add a speedy tag. (I'd make a joke about you having no friends to play with, but I'm typing this in the dark and all alone). Your nomination looks reasonable and I would lean towards delete. I'm hesitant about adding an AfD without you looking first. Bgwhite (talk) 08:21, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Go for it, no concerns. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection request
Hi there, this is just to let you know that SMcCandlish has asked for the unprotection (and move protection) of Facundo Argüello (tennis) at WP:RFPP. I thought you might want to take a look at it seeing as you protected it less than a week ago. (I note that the protection is going to run out in a few hours, but still.) Best — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 09:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Responded, thanks! --j⚛e deckertalk 17:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Alison Norrington PROD page deletion/reinstatement?
Hi Joe. Please could you reinstate my wikipedia page. You'd proposed to delete it. I hadn't seen this and so the 7 days came and went. And now I don't exist any longer on wikipedia... :( Could you please reinstate the page as there are key updates that need to be made.  Many thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisonnorrington (talk • contribs) 17:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Done, as an expired PROD it's eligible for restoring pretty much immediately, however, there are three significant issues that, in my estimation, will need to be solved before the article is retained for the long run. First, articles on Wikipedia are required to evidence notability--which they generally do through the inclusion of multiple, independent, reliable third-party sources which discuss the subject in a neutral way.  Newspaper articles, books, and journal publications that discuss the article subject (apparently yourself) in depth are typical.  Please see WP:GNG for the relevant guideline.
 * Second, the article is not written in an encyclopedic tone, and may be seen as being promotional--in fact, it appears some of it is cut and pasted from your promotional bio.
 * Finally, since we have no way of knowing here, on-wiki, that you are in fact the person who controls the copyright to that text, and since it's clear that much of that text was copied from a source listed as copyrighted elsewhere, we'll be put in the position of removing that text to honor our copyright obligations until and unless you identify yourself and demonstrate copyright ownership, and follow the appropriate steps to license that material in such a way that it's eligible for reuse, see Donating_copyrighted_materials. Because the tone of those materials is non-encyclopedic, I recommend a rewrite rather than a copyright paperwork dance.
 * I've informed the editor who nominated the article for deletion of its restoration. If I can explain any of this, please feel free to ask any questions, I'll be glad to help.  Best regards, --j⚛e deckertalk 18:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 3
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 3. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * --j⚛e deckertalk 21:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

uneasy truce was holding but...
I hadn't added a thing since your semi-brokering last go around but it appears one of us didn't get the message in looking at the text removal at Facundo Argüello (tennis). Please head this off. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've fully protected the article. I'm not sure whose version I left at top, but I'm really tired of this nonsense.  Walk away.  --j⚛e deckertalk 19:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hence the reason I stopped making the edits to new articles. I had walked away and completely disengaged with one troublesome editor. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Thank you.  I've also dropped a note at WT:AN asking for a close of that ancient RFC.  Not sure it will help, but it can't hurt.  Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 21:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Joe.
 * It was unfortunate that you protected the article at its current status. The troublesome editor had re-added the nonsense again, against the result of the RfC here. The troublesome editor alleges that he has "walked away", yet he spotted a change to an article that hadn't been edited for 3 months within an hour, and reverted it. On another tennis player article, the one on Jörgen Windahl, it actually took him 1 hour and 2 minutes to spot the change and revert it. (Check here to see what kind of "important things" he keeps adding.) This proves that he is either stalking my edits or having these articles on his watchlist, or both.
 * So, in addition to ignoring prevailing consensus, the troublesome editor seems to have developed a WP:OWN attitude to these articles, and is set on fighting a retreating [edit] war over each and every article that still contains this nonsense. It's very generous of him to refrain from adding the rubbish to more articles... I would have hoped that you could see through this. Walked away - yeah right.
 * The troublesome editor is following in the footsteps of blocked user Dolovis and ArbCom-ed user GoodDay, only he's acting a little smarter, so he dodges blocks for edit warring and disruptive editing. Well, I guess we'll have to open yet another RfC to finally have the issue decided once and for all, and see if he follows that. His editing history so far is not encouraging, so let's not be too hopeful. Cheers.
 * HandsomeFella (talk) 21:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow. For the record, 1) you are not the editor I was referring to. That was something that needed multiple administrators to sort through and i followed their insight. 2) I thought we were trying to come to some sort of compromise while working it out on the talk page. I was. 3) Of course I have it watched, I think all the pages I edit are automatically set to watch. 4) I have still not added any new items to new pages even after the transgressions (now at 2) you have made. I admit I was close to doing so after this recent edit by you, but I still feel it's best to try to come to some compromise consensus for the benefit of our readers. I even tried in the last correction to handle it as Encyclopedia Britannica does with Nastase. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Might I ask
 * who you were referring to, if not me, and on what grounds? Please provide diffs.
 * what is your definition of "walking away"? Having all articles with the phrase "known professionally as" on your talkpage? What kind of browser do you use anyway? I ask since you're alleging that it automatically adds all your edited pages - all 1,879 unique articles, according to your edit counter - to your watchlist. Is that actually true? You "think" so? Isn't it hard work to keep track of that many articles? If one digs deeper into the statistics, your 9,954 edits gives an average on 5.30 edits per page edited. My 17,781 edits on 8,163 unique pages gives an average of 2.18 edits per page edited. The statistics might give a clue to who's the undisputed King of Reverts here.
 * Btw, our task is not to mirror Encyclopedia Britannica, no matter how respectable that source is.
 * HandsomeFella (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Query 1, I refuse to answer... per administrator advice. If for any reason you thought it was you I apologize for the confusion, and the fact that we are conversing should show that. Query 2, The auto page watch is a setting for wikipedia under watch list preferences. It's browser independent afaik. As for walking away there were multiple editors on both sides of the issue adding and subtracting. Some of us (self included) had planned on continuing to add to all tennis articles just as others were planning to remove all traces of alternate spellings from all articles (not just tennis). With the truce that admin Decker hoped for I decided not to add any more sourced spellings to new articles (I can't speak for others on either side of the issue). I told Joe as much, but also said that it goes for as long as the tennis articles already with English spellings added were left as is. I hated it, but did it anyway. Of course 100's of non-tennis articles were reverted to their native spellings in the interim, and new tennis articles have been created in what I would consider a censored state. After quite awhile you removed content on one of those tennis articles, which put flags up on my watchlist. Sure it's hard to keep track of lots of watched pages but I do my best. I'm not sure what those edit numbers mean but I combat a lot of vandalism on tennis pages every single day... it's never ending and usually thankless, but I look at it as being part of the job and giving back at wiki Tennis Project. I hate using JD's talk page for this conversation... better one of our own. Sorry Joe. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks like someone closed the ancient RfC, no consensus. Where that leaves us is exactly where I'd hoped not to be--there's nothing but article-by-article consensus at the moment on the "professionally" known as wording--my hope was that a broader consensus there would provide some alignment which would avoid edit warring going forward. All editors are advised to discuss this question appropriately and to not edit war on the question. Best of luck. Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 17:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The comments that I added may help forge a consensus. ;-) The RfC should have been at WP:BLP, not WP:MOSBIO.  TENNISNAMES and the RfC also should have cited WP:BLP rather than pretending to override it.  LittleBen (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Consider yourself welcome to, and in fact encouraged to, start an RfC on your own if you think it will help.  --j⚛e deckertalk 17:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)