User talk:Joshua Scott/Archive 1

Hi
Just a friendly note - the template that you included on User talk:Phantomsteve is usually meant to notify the original author of the article only, not other editors who have commented on it. I know Phantomsteve's talk page can get pretty full, so (per WP:DTTR) you may want to consider removing the templated deletion warning and just leave your notes about the deletion nomination there. Regards,  7  07:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I removed the template as you suggested. Joshua Scott (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks.  7  07:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

GOsa
Hi Josh, Just a suggestion, but could you tackle the copy edit on this article? It has been languishing in the copy edit queue since October 2007. I have not the computer lingo to bring it up to a standard where the average reader could glean any meaning from it. Regards, --Diannaa (talk) 16:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at it this evening, but I usually avoid copy-editing on articles that have multiple problems like this one does. I'll give it my best shot, though. Joshua Scott (talk) 17:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I looked at it, and did my best to improve it, but I found that almost none of the material could be verified. I found a new source, and used what I found there to clean up the unsourced material, but I'm strongly considering nominating it for deletion considering its lack of notability. Joshua Scott (talk) 06:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for copyediting
I saw your name over at LOCE. Do you have time to help out with copyediting on the article Electric Mud? (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 00:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC))
 * I'm making a couple of changes, but I'm not very familiar with Muddy Waters, so I can't do much more than simple clarity & grammar changes. Overall, I think the article is quite good, however, the Production section seems slightly disjointed; I'd like to see more of a smooth transition between the paragraphs in that section.  In particular, the second paragraph seems to belong more with the beginning of paragraph 1, as it describes the makeup of the backing band. I'm also not sure about the Buddy Guy quote—it needs some clarification as to what he is trying to say IMHO. The sentence about Howling Wolf I would consider removing, given that it doesn't relate very closely to the topic of this album.  Finally, in the Legacy section, the Allmusic review doesn't fit with the rest of that paragraph.  I'd suggest adding perhaps a couple more recent reviews and creating a separate paragraph about recent critical reception.
 * These are just suggestions, I don't feel comfortable with making these changes, given that I don't have access to most of the source materials. Joshua Scott (talk) 04:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Removed PROD from American Technologies Network Corporation
Hi there, I'm just leaving you notice that I've removed the proposed deletion template from the above article, because PROD is supposed to be used for uncontroversial, uncontested deletions. It's pretty clear from the talk page discussion that the author of the article is opposed to deletion. Whether or not he has a COI, or is even actively editing Wikipedia, if any editor objects to the deletion in good faith then proposed deletion can't continue. However, you can still nominate the article at AfD. Thank you. --  At am a  頭 00:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I've been on WP for a while, but just now starting to get more involved; when I put the PROD on that page I wasn't fully aware that the PROD was only for uncontroversial articles.  I went ahead and did the AfD process and listed it there.  Thanks again for pointing out the PROD requirements, I'll keep it in mind in the future. Joshua Scott (talk) 04:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 15 Minutes (novel)
42px An editor has nominated 15 Minutes (novel), an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Human Rights in Cuba
Thanks for the heads-up. It's a bit like playing whack-a-mole sometimes, isn't it? Boomshadow talk contribs 01:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Metropolitan area populations
Never mind, I was trying to make a correction to an article but I have solved the problem.--AndresTM (talk) 04:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Team Bohe
Hello LiberalFascist, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Team Bohe - a page you tagged - because: '''Those are top Korean Go players. Article needs improvement, but is ineligible for speedy deletion.''' Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 23:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really care one way or the other, but WP:CSD is for "An article about ... an organization ... that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." Could you point out where in the article there is a claim of notability or significance?  Joshua Scott (talk) 23:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the claim need not be explicit, i.e the article text doesn't have to spell out: "This team is significant because ..." The article lists as members of the club some of the top Go players of Korea, which is an indication that the club itself is of importance. Regards, decltype (talk) 00:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I see what you mean, I'll be more careful about that in the future. Thanks for the note about it. Just FYI, there are a few of these similar clubs PRODded and at AfD in case you are interested. Joshua Scott (talk) 01:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, although I do not feel strongly one way or the other. I suppose the problem is locating references. I'm sure they exist in Korean but I would not be able to find them. decltype (talk) 01:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

how can i make my editing Permanent?
Farah-55 (talk) 05:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You can't. Please read the welcome message links on your talk page.  Every time you edit, you'll see the message "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here".  Joshua Scott (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I need help pleaes
===hellow, i truely need help. the list of aishwarya rai's awards and nominations is missing a lot of awards and nominations she earned in her carrer .and there are many lists of awards and nominations belong to actresses ,it contain all the awards,so pleaes i need help everytime i edit her missing awards and nominations they go and my work is worthless pleaes tell me what to do in order to edit the missing information so that they appeare always like the other lists. i didn't understand the Previous message you sent me pleaes explain to me.=== thank you so much Farah-55 (talk) 04:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Love/Truelove Brewster
Hi Josh,

I have attempted to move the page in question. I have received the following error message and cannot move page. I submitted a request to have it moved, but any help is welcome. Love Brewster does not exist: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text. Dranster (talk) 19:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

University of Newcastle medical school
The old logo was for the Medical Society not the Medical school. The motto does not exist. I go to the medical school.

Please revert my change.

Thanks you for your concern —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.1.251 (talk) 05:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the follow-up, you are correct, I was too hasty in reverting. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 05:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Area 88 (Trance)
Hello LiberalFascist, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Area 88 (Trance) has been removed. It was removed by 159.182.1.4 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 159.182.1.4 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) 14:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 14:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry.

This was the page I was trying to delete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tom_Papania/Archive_1

I did not mean to delete the discussion page. Tom Papania was deleted, usually the talk pages get deleted. Maybe you could figure out how to do it. --SuperHappyPerson (talk) 02:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)# SuperHappyPerson


 * No problem, I figured it was something like that. Looks like User:Malik Shabazz actually deleted that page already, so it's taken care of now. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 03:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Vaughan L. Baird
I did think about removing it but I didn't because I did a poor 5 second job with it and it still doesn't fix some of the faults in the article like the close copyvio that you pointed out. It does technically fix the problem asserted by the delete reason I suppose so I could remove it but I'm going to take a wait and see approach. --Sin Harvest (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it
Editors, here, seem to be personal - or somekind of failed dictators. They delete articles before they know what is about. There is a list of business networks in Wikipedia - most of them useless and some of them they don't exist anymore and when I tried to add Skillipedia.com business network they accused me of advertising. If so how they have approved all this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking_websites

Or may be this website, http://www.playboy.com/, listed there is a social network for professional ... to get laid: top content for top wiki !

And you expect me to be a good citizen!

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iskills (talk • contribs) 02:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you feel that way, but replacing a large section of the Functional Training article with "I could see why people tend to vadalise WikiPedia pages becausee of the behaviour of its editors" and another section with "rats, snakes and  spiders"  is not helping with the problems that Wikipedia has (and I don't deny that there are problems.)  I would guess that Skillipedia.com was removed because that list is only for sites that already have a Wikipedia page.  If you feel it is a notable network, you can create the Skillipedia.com page (making sure you back up the content with reliable sources) and then add it to the list.  I believe you've made some good contributions to Wikipedia, and have good intentions, but please read the welcome message I placed on your talk page, and take what it says to heart.


 * I hope you won't leave because of negative experiences with other editors. This is a large project, and we all have different viewpoints and backgrounds.  When another editor removes your work, it can be very annoying, but try to discuss it with them before jumping to a conclusion.  Most likely they have been reverting vandalism for a while, and they may have acted too quickly.  Almost everyone here is willing to talk about the changes they made.  This essay talks about this process.  Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have, and please continue to make positive contributions to Wikipedia.  Thanks! —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 03:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTI)
FYI edit JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems to be deleted already, anything I should know? —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 12:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I had removed the speedy tag, as it was not a copyvio as the source is public domain (US Goverment). It is now deleted, as CSD.  I am not sure how that happened. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The deletion summary was "non-encyclopedic - copy of another web site http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/dpac_uti.html". It was a copy, and I wasn't sure about copyright on US government materials, so I tagged it.  Probably was deleted because the creating user has been creating a lot of new articles in this same subject area, mostly non-notable promotional articles.  Thanks for the note on the US Government public domain stuff, I'll keep that in mind for the future.   —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 17:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Billy E. Vaughn

 * Supporting documentation has been added to this bibliography under the Notes section.
 * This article has been wikified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonas bohman (talk • contribs) 20:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
I wish to thank you for the welcome template you gave me. --White Trillium (talk) 04:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You're quite "welcome" ;). Seriously though, It's always good to have another person willing to do the work of vandalism fighting, and I thought it was just wrong that you had a warning and no welcome on your talk page. You seem to be getting along pretty well, but let me know if you have any questions.  —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 04:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do have I question, are you or are you not an administrator, and what must I do to get rollback. --White Trillium (talk) 04:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not an administrator. Rollback is granted at the discretion of administrators, and can be requested at Requests_for_permissions.  The basic requirements are to have a good understanding of what is and isn't vandalism, and to agree to only use rollback for reverting obvious vandalism. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 04:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will try to request it as soon as possible. I appreciate the help Mr. Fascist. --White Trillium (talk) 04:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

damn, your on the ball. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.211.247.237 (talk) 04:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Shiney Ahuja
The edit on Shiney Ahuja is 100% true. Please Google ... and verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.0.96.36 (talk) 05:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:BLP for why we cannot have potentially defamatory material without very solid evidence. You did not provide that evidence, so the change was reverted. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 05:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

credible citations to support Billy E. Vaughn
A message at the top of the page indicates that there are "no" citations supporting the information making up this biography. There are several citations since the bio was posted. Can this be updated to reflect the changes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonas bohman (talk • contribs) 00:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for your work on this, I've changed the tag to reflect the current needs for improvement. Since this is an article about a living person, the article should have inline citations.  If you would like some help in creating those, please let me know, and I'd be glad to give you some pointers, as citing can be a little cumbersome.  —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 02:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

PartyJoe
25px Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page User talk:PartyJoe has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. PartyJoe (talk) 02:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.106.63 (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 02:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

sorry
i'm so sorry .. i'm only making trick on my little brother .. sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.147.229.230 (talk) 03:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Joshua Scott, my edits to FASTER THAN LIGHT are not vandalism. In fact, it is the people reverting it back who are committing vandalism. And I note that most of them have just reverted it back with no explanation and not even an attempt at justification! Although special relativity is often misunderstood, it is an EXPLANATION of how the universe is. There is no mechanism in SR that would actually STOP one from accelerating greater than c. And there is, given the vastness of the universe, many points of view where speeds can be measured and would be less than c, but there are many other points of view (which we cannot measure or see directly) where a logical speed greater than c can be inferred. No one framework is more valid than another. There is no one absolute framework. It is indeed all relative. 216.239.82.80 (talk) 04:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I saved my reply on what I think is your talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.82.80 (talk) 04:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Stevan Knezevich
I didn't think the source was good enough, but it was interesting so I put it on the talk page. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Faster than light
Sorry, I don't know if you'll see this. But I've been blocked from articles, discussion pages, and even, it seems, most talk pages. And as I pointed out that the blocking was unjustified, I don't expect that will change any time soon. So I don't know if you'll even see this. 216.239.82.80 (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe you have been unblocked now, as your block was only for 48 hours. Since you've posted this here, it would appear that the block has expired.
 * Please discuss the changes you were wanting to make at the talk page and we will try to move forward with improving the article. Thanks! —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 11:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

inline citations
Citations in inline format have been added to this page, Joshua. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonas bohman (talk • contribs) 21:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Great! The article is looking good. I've changed the tag to remove the note about inbound links.  There's still some facts that are not supported by a citation as far as I can tell, so I left the tag asking for additional sources. In particular some of the information about his early life, and in the Education section should be backed up by a source.  Don't look at the tag as a slight on your work, rather it is an invitation to others to help expand and source the article.  I have to congratulate you on getting it this far, and thanks for improving wikipedia! —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 23:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page! Best, MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Archiving on WP:BLPPROD
Is the bot working? I had turned it down in order to get it to archive some threads. I see you turned it up to 5 days, but it still doesn't seem to be working (it should have done some by now). Any ideas? Gigs (talk) 21:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No idea, I also fixed the config so the archives would go into Archive 3, but it should have archived some by now. It doesn't appear to be down. Maybe bump it back to 3 and see what happens. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 23:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I copy/pasted miszabot's example config exactly so hopefully it'll work now. Gigs (talk) 23:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Keep an eye on Abd al-Qadir.
He's basically been adding the equivalent of 'Wow, this guy's so great and the French, well they just suck' as pretty much every one of his edits. I swear, haven't these people ever heard of neutrality? Half Shadow  02:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I've been noticing. I'm going to drop a welcome note on his page, and see if we can't get this resolved. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 02:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hiiiiiii I am really confused as to what I am biased about —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvoigt3 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont mean to be biased, but i have to do this project for a class of mine at my undergradute institution. its not like i am purposely on abd al-qudir's side but all my research as lead me to that. So instead of saying "havent these people ever herad of neutrality?" you could help me and point me to where you think that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvoigt3 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for trying to improve things, that is always welcomed. One of the pillars of Wikipedia is neutrality.  This means we do not cast subjects in a positive or negative light, we simply write about all the significant viewpoints, while refusing to take a viewpoint ourselves.  This can be difficult to do when you have strong feelings about a subject, but it is required when writing or modifying an article.  in the last edit you made, saying "[he was] widely known for his courage, intelligence, piousness, and strength" is not a neutral statement.  If there are reliable sources that call him courageous, it would be appropriate to provide a citation and attribute that statement to the source.  For example, "John Smith called al-Qadir a 'courageous warrior'", and cite the book or work in which he made that exact statement. Let me know if you still have any questions. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 02:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Misuse of sources

 * See here and here. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I'm not sure what this has to do with me :) —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 02:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Your IMDB summary/essay
"as opposed to editors taking information from the credits themselves, which I would consider original research." Primary sourcing from episodes/films isn't normally considered original research, if it doesn't extrapolate or analyze. Gigs (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I modified it a bit. Feel free to add your thoughts to the essay, though. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 02:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Asaram Bapu
We have some work to do here. What's funny is, when we're done, the partisans, pro and con, will come along and rewrite it into unrecognizable crap. So it goes! Drmies (talk) 23:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I try not to think about that, too depressing. I'm no expert, but I'll do what I can.  —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 01:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Quick Note
Just wanted to point out that you replaced my tag here with a duplicate tag. 'BLP refimprove' and 'BLP sources' result in the same template display....--Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 13:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * D'oh! I was going through this list, which is supposed to be mistagged BLPs, and I had been changing them to BLP sources if they had sources, so I guess I just got going too fast.  No harm done.  —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 14:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty much doing the same deal, just wanted to make sure you weren't making more work for yourself! Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 14:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your ongoing efforts

 * Wow, my first Barnstar! I don't even have a place to put it yet.  Thanks, Gigs!  I really think we will be able to get under the 30K goal by June 1.  I plan on doing everything I can to get there. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 22:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyedit Backlog Elimination Drive
Hi, as a member of the Guild of Copy Editors you're hereby notified of and invited to participate in the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/May 2010. Please help us eliminate the 8,000+ copyedit backlog! Participating editors will receive barnstars and other awards, according to their level of participation. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Ha, I like it. Need to get back to work. :) Pats 1  T / C 23:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:BLP IMDB refimprove
30pxTemplate:BLP IMDB refimprove has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Jack Merridew 03:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Matt Saincome
hello. I'm new here. But I live in california and feel like its really important to get a page about matt saincome up. Can you help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Fact Nazi (talk • contribs) 06:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd like to help, but I don't know much about Matt Saincome, and I can't find a lot about him in reliable sources. Please take a look at the notability guideline and verifiability policy.  Basically you have to find 2 significant reliable sources-like a newspaper article or book-about him, or eventually the article will end up being deleted.  If you want help, I would strongly recommend leaving a message at the Music project, by clicking here and someone should be able to help you find reliable sources for music.  — Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 06:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Haha
Thanks, you were quite right. And I just copied it from some cool editor. Drmies (talk) 20:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for doing the research to answer my question. I was working from a handheld device and it was hard enough just to type-out a short message. I'd usually do that kind of stuff myself so I was a bit embarrassed to ask.  Will Beback   talk    09:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, It was pretty interesting to look through the earlier versions of the policies. --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 12:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

BLP and groups
You ask on my talk page... To reply... No, you have my intent backwards (but I can see how you were confused)... small groups are closer to (if not the same as) being individual living people, so more care is needed when making statements about small groups than when making statements about large ones. I have edited the paragraph to (hopefully) make this clearer. Blueboar (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "Quick question, you added this to BLP on 4 April, which I change here, effectively reversing the meaning. Was I correct in assuming that you wanted to say that more care should be taken with small groups?"

help! on BLP IMDB tags when Multiple Issues present
Help!! I notice on one article that i just tagged, that the BLP IMDB refimprove and BLP IMDB-only refimprove tags, are not being applied sometimes when I thot they would be, namely when an article has multiple issues covered by Multiple issues. I didn't understand how the Multiple issues template was supposed to display, thot maybe it just displayed the first issues in a list, so i didn't think anything was wrong, when AWB accpeted previous use of Multiple issues template or imposed new use because several tags were present. Somehow now it clicked for me that Multiple issues template was just ignoring these new tags.

I had blindly assumed that the Multiple issues template programming was smart, and would accept an entry like "BLP IMDB refimprove=May 2010" or "BLP IMDB-only refimprove=May 2010", just as it already accepted "BLP refimprove=May 2010". Not correct. So for example this edit by me removed an article from BLP unreferenced, but did not put it into BLP IMDB-only refimprove as i wished. In fact it showed no message relating to BLP refimprove at all, and it did not add the article to Category:Articles sourced only by IMDB. And an article getting BLP IMDB refimprove within the Multiple issues template likewise would not add it to Category:Articles sourced by IMDB. (Those categories i added successfully to the templates.)

What needs to be done is to edit Template:Multiple issues. The template has a sandbox version and a testcases. I edited the testcases, but changing the actual code in the sandbox is bogging me down. What needs to be done is to add 2 sections very much like the section implementing BLP refimprove, just after it. To handle these two cases.

Note, going forward i could avoid use of Multiple issues template, and just add a BLP IMDB refimprove tag separately from that. But, I already did put several hundred inside the Multiple issues template. (Estimated by 1014 cumulative IMDB zapping edits tracked by me at User:Doncram/IMDBzap, minus 174 now showing in IMDB-only category, minus 573 showing in IMDB category, minus some but not too many articles fixed by other editors ). I see no easy way to go back and find these to manually edit them. So think it would be best to just get the Template:Multiple issues adjusted now.

Would it be easier for you / possible for you to do that? :) I would be grateful! Help! --doncram (talk) 04:02, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for attacking the problem! It seems to be almost working but not quite.  I went and changed the sandbox, probably not correctly, to try to add something that seemed missing.  Specifically, your 4 edits there had added "BLP IMDB-only refimprove" in one place where it seemed to me that "BLP IMDB refimprove" should also be added.  In my edit, perhaps incorrectly, i added the other and moved them both down to next section where i thot they might apply.  Really i am having trouble reading the code, am not sure at all.


 * But also, it seems necessary/good to test the sandbox version in a mainspace article, as the categories do not show for some reason in the testcases article. I applied the sandbox version of Multiple issues with each of the two tags, one by one, in the Mark Fite article, in this version of Mark Fite page testing the "BLP IMDB refimprove" tag and the next version following which applies "BLP IMDB-only refimprove" tag.  Notice that the categories added are not quite right.  Note the name of categories includes "from from" when just "from" is meant.  Not sure if otherwise all right.  Can you see what needs to be fixed?


 * Also, i wasn't aware that this would start up month-dated categories of these tags. Did you mean that?  I suppose it could be okay/good.  Not sure if it applies now just to the articles covered in the Multiple issues template;  perhaps it does.  So then, to match, it would seem also perhaps appropriate to add the programming for month-dated categories into the two more basic BLP IMDB refimprove templates.  Not sure if that should be done.  Maybe it should be done, as the numbers in total should be around 1,000 now, and should climb further before declining.  At wt:URBLP there was report of a list of supposedly 10,000 IMDB-only articles (of which only some currently tagged into BLP unreferenced).  Not sure whether it gets harder to keep simple, non-month-segmented categories or to go with month-segmented categories sooner rather than later.


 * Thanks again for your prompt, effective help! --doncram (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added an editprotected tag to the talk page, and removed the monthly categorizations from the multiple issues/sandbox version. If you look here you can see the hidden categories—I hid the IMDB categories, per WP:HIDDENCAT.


 * We may also need to get some wider community consensus before the change will be made, though. I'll be mainly offline for the next 10 hours at work, but I'll check now and then. --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 13:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for perservering! Yes, i see resolution at Template talk:Multiple issues.  Thanks also for providing cross-category reportlist confirming that they are being categorized correctly.  I thot there were more already, but that's fine.  Because of the difference between total i've tracked as being IMDBzapped (at User:Doncram/IMDBzap) vs. total in the two categories, I think actually a couple hundred of the articles i have tagged as "BLP IMDB-only refimprove" or "BLP IMDB refimprove" have been actually properly fixed up by other watching editors.  I noticed only a few specifically because i am not putting them all on my watchlist.  But this is ideal as an outcome.  It seems to have been very productive already to have started up this BLP IMDB tagging.  Thanks so much! --doncram (talk) 15:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

one event
Wikipedia is full of articles of people known for one event. I don't seek to delete them. However, we are making a mockery of ourselves. That's why a policy that reflects actual practice might be better. BLP1E makes a reference to the main article which discusses reasons to include or exclude people and does so in a neutral fashion. The BLP1E section tends to be written in a deletionist way.

There is the decision whether to force Wikipedia to comply with the policy or have a policy that can be adhered to. That is not my decision or your decision to make.

Without picking on certain articles, there are many, many articles on people who are not very famous that are known for only one thing. The easiest way is to just leave the articles alone and use language such as.....

''When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether or not to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and the degree of significance of the individual's role within it should be considered. The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person. However, as both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles become justified.''

''If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate. On the other hand, if an event is of sufficient importance.''

''Another issue arises when an individual plays a major role in a minor event. In this case, it is not generally appropriate to have an article on both the person and the event. Generally in this case, the name of the person should redirect to the article on the incident. In some cases, however, a person famous for only one event may be more widely known than the event itself. In such cases, the article about the event may be most appropriately named for the person involved.''

Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, but I'd prefer keeping the discussion on the relevant talk pages. --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 18:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I seek your opinion and do not want to change policies at the moment. Only when I understand what several people think will I even consider making proposals. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Reversion on In God we Trust
Why in the world do you consider what I wrote as vandalism ? It is the truth and I can verify it. Most sincerely, In God We Trust the Artist, formerly known as Steve Kreuscher
 * archivable –Joshua Scott [who?] 01:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't remember voting for User:Example.... ;) Congrats, and good luck!  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 06:07, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

guidance needed
Hi Joshua, check out my reply to your message on my talk page. Thanks, X12R5G (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Guenter Rieger
Please explain why this post should be deleted. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kontabo (talk • contribs) 22:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Guenter Rieger
Please remove Guenter Rieger. I have to learn more about WIKIPEDIA. Thank you. Guidance welcome for future articles. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kontabo (talk • contribs) 22:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Revised Article
Hi Joshua, If you have a minute, please check an update on my talk page.

Thanks, Bob X12R5G (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey
I dont understand why you keep changing my updates.

Didnt I put the hangon marker to indicate that I was contesting the speedy deletion???

tyrekm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyrekm (talk • contribs) 05:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the db-a7 tag needs to stay in as well. The author of an article is not allowed to remove the speedy deletion template.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 05:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

ok i didnt know that. sorry, I thought you were just being a jerk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyrekm (talk • contribs) 05:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Certainly wasn't my intention. I'll leave the article alone, though.  However, if it doesn't meet the notability guideline it will eventually be deleted anyway. Let me know if you have any questions about this.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 05:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Raw Water
Speedy delete for an article created in 2004 seems a little bizarre. However it was only created to satisfy a whim of another editor and could happily be deleted. Speedy though seems a little over the top!  Velela  Velela Talk 08:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Jeremystalked
This guy is still spamming his blog site to other articles, despite your warnings. He keeps calling my reverts and warnings "revenge" edits (he has some serious issues, if his website is any indication). As he claimed to "understand" your warning about his spamming on one page, perhaps you can clarify for him that it is not appropriate on any article, not just that one? I've asked User:The Rambling Man to take a look at his actions as well, as I'm getting really tired of his bad faith personal attacks and he doesn't seem to have any actual desire to be productive here other than his one cleaning of the Beyonce article. I've already left him a final warning, but his responses show he has no intention of changing. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 15:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Abby Hagyard
I've done some work on the article, turning this into THIS. Might you offer advice for further improvements... or care to asist in researching the additional ACTRA Awards? Thanks, -- Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've looked, but that was pretty much all I found. There are some interviews on the YCDTOT website, if you want to extract something from there.  Well done on fixing the article up, I think there probably is some more out there, just not online.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 02:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I did quite happily find that the good folks at the YCDTOT website have archived some of the Ottawa Citizen articles no longer online. You did some pretty good BEFORE yourself at the AFD... and kinda helped motivate me to fix it up some. Wiki-beers all around. ~  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 04:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

"... less than 123 years old"
Hi. I noted your addition to the BLP policy page to the effect that the BLP policy will apply to an individual who would be less than 123 years old, unless there is reliable proof of death. I was wondering whether there has been any prior discussion that established a consensus for this, or whether it is your own suggestion. If the former, I'd appreciate a link; if the latter, it might be best to have such a discussion (perhaps on the BLP talkpage). Thanks and regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 08:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It was brought up briefly at WT:BLP, but I mainly based it on the language at Category:Living people. I don't feel strongly about it one way or the other, but considering that any article in Category:Living people would be eligible for BLP protection, the change seemed logical to me. I do note that Jclemens, who's one of the strongest proponents of reducing the scope of BLP, did not seem to have a problem with the language, so I would think this will have easy consensus.  Nevertheless, if you would like to see plainer consensus, I'd be happy to have an RfC.   I'd rather have the age at 110 years, plus anyone on  List of living supercentenarians.   --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 15:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Although I wish there were a reasonable possibility that people born 123 years ago or even 110 years ago would still be living persons, as a practical matter I think a presumptive age of 100 would be more than ample. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback. I've opened a discussion at WT:BLP.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 18:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
LiberalFascist - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.

I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.

Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.

Thank you! 7 22:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

PIGS
Rannpháirtí anaithnid

Would you comment on the back-story to the sources problem (a bold rewrite of the article by 99.141.*.* that I see as introducing many of the referencing problems)? I've replied to you here about it. --RA (talk) 11:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

High Peak disambig.
Hi, Just to say you've done an impressive job of disambiging the various High Peak entries. Cheers. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 09:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Edits concerning page on Ivan L. Moody (american singer)
I have answered your message on my page concerning these edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.218.220 (talk) 09:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding subject-specific notability
Right now, editors are considering all the subject specific guidelines as a way around the GNG. This isn't a problem with the wording of your new proposed guideline, it's a fundamental problem with the way that subject-specific notability is handled right now. Here are some examples:


 * Articles_for_deletion/Wassim_Almawi_(2nd_nomination) - No third party biographical coverage at all, but his published work is cited, so we keep it.
 * Articles_for_deletion/David_S._Alberts - His name is dropped in a couple places, but no third party biographical coverage.  His work is notable, but he isn't.  But that doesn't matter, because highly cited work meets WP:PROF, regardless of whether there's any sources upon which to actually build an article.
 * Articles_for_deletion/Olav_Basoski No biographical sources, but charted a song at #45 on UK charts, so was kept per WP:MUSIC #2
 * Dr. Handel: "Wikipedia's "specific" notability criteria are what made all of this possible. Without WP:ACADEMIC, it would have taken a lot of maneuvering to sell the article as passing the general notability guideline, and it may well have been deleted."  Sure it's a breaching experiment, but the subject-specific notability is what let an unverifiable article exist for as long as it did.

The entire point of the subject-specific guidelines is to allow these unverifiable biographies to continue to exist. If there were sources upon which to build a verifiable article, then it should be pretty easy to demonstrate that the person meets the GNG. It is for this reason I will oppose all subject-specific guidelines as long as they supersede the GNG and WP:N. Gigs (talk) 14:22, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I can respect your position, and I am opposed to the SNGs superseding the GNG as you are (especially when it comes to living persons). However, right now WP:ATH is a much worse guideline than NSPORT, so I'm trying to move toward a SNG that relies on the GNG, and just gives rules of thumb to prevent deletion just because there's no WP:GHITS.  In short, we are attempting to create a SNG that is completely opposite WP:PROF.  I do think the SNGs are important because AfD is a very iffy process, and concrete rules rather than the vague "significant coverage" help keep it grounded.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 17:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Grab some glory, and a barnstar
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank spam!
User:TFOWR/Thankspam TFOWR 21:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Grab some glory, and a barnstar
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. <font face="Papyrus"> mo no  so  ck   03:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

''Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)''

AWB - HMS Birkenhead (1845)
Please check your edits when using AWB, it messed up an image on HMS Birkenhead (1845). Regards --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">palmiped | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 07:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I do check my edits, but I have to admit that It didn't occur to me that doubled single quotes inside an image link would break the display of the image. That seems like a bug of some sort. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 12:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

unreferencedBLP tag
Hi. I've left a reply on my talk page. Epbr123 (talk) 07:25, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Script
Ok - I'll try it! also, something that might be causing it, judging from my layman's eye - with the variable c_end, "index of" recognizes ";", while in c_start, "pendch_show_box"is blue., should the parentheses be around C_start instead? I'm just comparing it to CSS and HTML.

// get our cookie if (document.cookie.length > 0) { var c_start = document.cookie.indexOf("pendch_show_box="); if (c_start != -1) { c_start = c_start + 13; var c_end = document.cookie.indexOf(";", c_start); if (c_end == -1) { c_end = document.cookie.length; }<b style="font-size:small; font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">~ </b><i style="font-size:small; font-family:Arial; color:#666990;">Qwerp</i> Qwertus  ·  _Contact Me_ · Get Adopted!   01:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

sorry about the tony morris page
im sorry for not refernecing the tony morris page and thanks for bringing it to my attention, reminds me of getting things wrong when i was at school do i get a punishment of detention haha —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginofish (talk • contribs) 15:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for my very first Barnstar! I have cleared more than 60 of those unreference BLP articles, but I didn't really expect anyone to notice. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 00:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!
What a kind appreciation! Thank you!!! --<font color='#66dd44'>j &#9883; e deckertalk 17:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

RfA
Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson which you are, of course, very welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

PIGS again
And again (reverted to the version that you had reverted from on 11th June). I reverted again.

You may not believe this, but I don't like reverting between versions, but there is still no explanation from 99.* as to what he/she dislikes about the version he/she keeps over writing. Or an answer to the criticism of the text he/she keeps putting in. --RA (talk) 13:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I replied on the talk page. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of WP:OR on the part of that editor.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 13:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite Block
You may not have noticed yet, but you have been blocked indefinitely on the German Wikipedia, the reason bing that you have “unsuitable user name”. I would like to petition for you being unblocked, as I think that that's a ridiculous reasoning, but in order to do so, regulations have it that I have to ask for your consent to do so. Would you be so kind ... ? Fossa <sub style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">?!  11:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello, my name is Minderbinder over on the German Wikipedia. I am the sysop who has blocked you there. You should know two that in parallel to blocking you on de:WP, I opened a discussion on our admin board, as I felt that my decision could use some more scrutiny. Maybe you want to have your say there. I assume you do not speak German, in that case I will gladly translate for you. You can still edit your de:WP User talk page, or you can answer here, it does not matter.
 * Contrary to stereotypes of Germans, I do enjoy humour, even of the scathing kind. Springtime for Hitler is hilarious, but it would have been impossible to produce this film in 1968 in Germany with a German cast. Names have different undertones in different settings. So while I apppreciate that your user name is not meant in any harmful way, and the humour is apparently tolerated here in en:WP, Germany has a vastly different past with respect to Fascism and Nazis. The book Liberal Fascism is virtually unknown in Germany, so that pun is lost as well. I simply do not want to find the word Fascist in any version history or contributors log. It is simply revolting, if you forgive me for expressing my feelings so strongly. Have a good day! PS: I cannot use my SUL account here on en:WP, as it was taken. So it is not an undue burden to have separate accounts for separate languages. --Minderbinder-de (talk) 13:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the message, I have replied on my talk page --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 15:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I have answered you there. --Minderbinder-de (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC) I have removed the point about Fossa's standing and presumed motives in this thread, as it is really not relevant to our conversation.

Rename on de:WP
Hello Joshua, would you like your name change to Joshua Scott to become effective on the German Wikipedia as well? If you answer in the affirmative right here on your talk page, a local bureaucrat at de:WP will take care of it. No need for filling out forms. How is that for German bureaucracy? ;-) --Minderbinder-de (talk) 06:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be great! (And from what I've seen, you're not even close to en.wiki bureaucracy :) ) --Joshua Scott (formerly LiberalFascist) 12:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. You have to merge the account on de.wp into your SUL-account again. Regards, — YourEyesOnly (talk) 14:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ivan L. Moody
If i may ask, on good terms, what part of the information added was in a negative light, beyond that which was already there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.218.220 (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Revert Ben Franklin
Hi Joshua, I edited the Ben Franklin page yesterday and it looks you accepted the pending changes, and then someone came along and undid that, which then caused someone else to revert the page back to before my edit as a result of 'vandalism'. It was only a small addition on his magic square invention as a test for my first contribution. Can you revert the page again? Also, just FYI I plan to create another account with a more appropriate handle(I created 'Sgvogel' in haste yesterday) tx Sgvogel (talk) 00:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the revert on my user page the other day. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Revert
Thanks for reverting my talk page :D  James ' ööders 06:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC) <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:brown; background-color:gold; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

 James ' ööders has given you a Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!

Spread the goodness of Cheeseburgers by adding {{subst:Cheeseburger}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

WP:Mistagged BLP cleanup
Haven't seen you edit this for nearly a month now. What's happened? Alzarian16 (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The list had gotten pared down and aged to the point of being irrelevant (IMHO), so I've been using Special:Export to grab the list of URBLPs, and the AWB database scanner to find ones that have ' ' in them. Once I have that list, I run a replace operation in AWB to replace the various unreferencedBLP tags with BLP sources.  I'm checking each one, and skipping it if the sources aren't any good.  There's probably only about 200 at this point that are incorrectly tagged (with a tag), if I had to guess. If you're interested, I can explain exactly how you can run the report.


 * Lately, though, I've been working through WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Unreferenced BLP stubs and adding 1 or 2 references to those, and removing the tag. --Joshua Scott (formerly LiberalFascist) 17:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * PS - now that I look, seems it's been updated. I'll have to take a look after I'm off work.  --Joshua Scott (formerly LiberalFascist) 18:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, we just got a new list from Tim1357. I looked at thirteen and was able to remove twelve tags, so apparently we haven't finished yet. I'd never thought of looking at stubs only though - I'll have to give that a try too. Alzarian16 (talk) 18:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

PendingChanges tool
Hi, I like your PendingChanges java script, it's very useful. But what would be nice is if you could flag those articles that are currently under review, as Special:OldReviewedPages does. You could highlight the article name in yellow, or something like that. I don't know how difficult that would be to do. —Bruce1eetalk 09:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yep, that should be fairly easy to do. I should have some time to work on it in a few hours.  –Joshua Scott [who?] 23:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ –Joshua Scott [who?] 01:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that looks great (I didn't see it at first, but then I remembered I had to bypass my cache). Thanks for your time. —Bruce1eetalk 05:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

good find
I always enjoy it when I discover a new book of interest. That Patrick Conley "Bill of Rights" book is a new one to me, good find! I just sent away for a personal copy. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. SaltyBoatr get wet 16:57, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

eu-football.info
Hi, I noticed you managed to add a link to the above site from the Bobby Browne (footballer born 1912) article. Did you have any problems adding the link, or did you have to make a specific whitelist request, as you will see from I was trying to get it unblocked (unsuccesfully at the time). Regards. Eldumpo (talk) 08:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's been a while, but I'm fairly sure that I didn't have to request a whitelist exception for it. I've only ever made one whitelist request, and it wasn't for that site.  –Joshua Scott [who?] 01:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for response. Eldumpo (talk) 06:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive Wrap-up
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor at 22:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC).

Alek Popov
Hi, I referenced the article and removed ref-template from it but still that one on the discussion stays and I'm not sure how to remove it? --Aleksd (talk) 06:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually think the message is pretty annoying and leaving the messages without current reason should be reconsidered and avoided. Or in other case make more clear messages for sourced / unsourced articles :) --Aleksd (talk) 21:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

tags/refereces mess
Dear Joshua, I was trying to submit my CV, and deleted one previous reference (irrelevant to my mind). Thus confronted tags/references mess... Needing help to publish CV. Please notify to allan.alakyla@tallinnlv.ee

Sincerely, Allan Alaküla —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.76.240.63 (talk) 20:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like someone took care of it. Let me know if you need any more help.  –Joshua Scott [who?] 15:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Saul Landau
I posted a question for you at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Saul_Landau#Neutrality Alden Loveshade (talk) 03:21, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Laura Massey Deleted page
I have been trying to gether information to create a wikipedia page for a xbox employee that seemed to have her name/page flagged for deletion. I have tried to read over the steps to try and get this fixed but I am new to wikipedia and confused. One page told me to contact a person that has deleted the page to to and get it resolved.

Laura Massey - Software Development Engineer in Test on the Xbox 360 (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/Live/EngineeringBlog/Home_, Co-host of "Major Nelson Radio" podcast (http://majornelson.com/default.aspx)

In a deletion thread, I saw something about credit source or info needed, not just because she is popular.

http://www.facebook.com/lauramassey http://www.flickr.com/photos/lauralollipop/ http://twitter.com/lauralollipop/ http://majornelson.com/default.aspx

If you do a search on wikipedia for Laura Massey you get the guy who runs the podcast she co-host.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Hryb

In his article he has a section called PodCast, in that it list the other host but not her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Toulouse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Neustadter

Here is the post she made when they created the section on the website for engineering blogs

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/Live/EngineeringBlog/011310-Welcome

I don't know what info you would need to show shes a important person in the xbox 360 community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregsteimel (talk • contribs) 17:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC) --Gregsteimel (talk) 18:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 backlog elimination drive update
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor (talk) at 16:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC).

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 23:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC).

So what do you think about the New World Order Joshua Scott?
I'd love to know 75.34.30.101 (talk) 06:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Joe Schmidt


 * If it involves fewer people spamming my talk page and vandalizing Wikipedia, I'm in. –Joshua Scott 06:23, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, cool then I guess you lose!!
Since your an evader of questions yet someone who's willing to put down his authority in overdrive, even when it isn't needed... I asked you a DIRECT question, remember that.. 75.34.30.101 (talk) 06:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Joe Schmidt

GOCE Year-end Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Year-end Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE drive news
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 20:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 15:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

Problems with PC (And New pages) script
I'm having problem with two of my scripts. I installed both TheJosh's New Page Patroller script and your Pending Changes script, and they both worked side by side. A few months ago, I broke my laptop, and so had to borrow one for a while, which I didn't go on Wikipedia much during that time. Recently, I've downloaded Chrome onto this laptop (which I had used on my old laptop as well), and have used WP more recently. However I've noticed that both scripts have stopped working. It sort of alternates between showing the NP tool and the PC tool, but whatever it is showing, the tool doesn't work (it doesn't show any changes when I expand it). If you know what the problem is, or if you can redirect me to someone who might, then please tell me. Thanks :) -- Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count ) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 15:06, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I used both side-by-side without problems, but I haven't been checking in that often. They seem to be working for me in Firefox 4.0 and Chrome 10.  Let me see what I can figure out based on the scripts you are loading.  –Joshua Scott 23:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I changed my vector.js file to match yours, and I'm not having a problem with it. Have you tried to clear your cache and such?  –Joshua Scott 23:49, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok ... this is weird ... for some reason, it's not working perfectly. I'm not sure what happened to do it, but it's working now. Thanks for your time and help anyway. -- Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count ) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 12:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

BLPPROD/Kana Tachibana
I've had to decline this. My understanding of the current consensus on the placement of BLPPRODs is at [{WP:BLPPROD#Nominating]], and it requires there be pretty much "no links whatsoever" at tag placement time. A higher threshold, strangely enough, is required to remove the sticky prod from an article once validly placed. I've got no issue with this being taken to regular PROD or AfD. Best, --joe deckertalk to me 15:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I guess I've been away from BLPPROD too long, and it has changed a bit since I last was involved. I'll keep that in mind going forward (or get it changed, maybe :) ).  –Joshua Scott 00:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:54, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:36, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 01:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 01:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:BLP IMDb refimprove
Template:BLP IMDb refimprove has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  16:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to events in June and July: bot, script, template, and Gadget makers wanted
I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 20:09, 2 April 2012 (UTC)