User talk:Just Chilling/Archive 7

GENSO
Hello, my name is Craig Kief. I would desperately like to post an article about GENSO. GENSO stands for the the Global Educational Network for Satellite Operations. It is a joint program between the European Space Agency and universities around the world. We provide free training on this system to universities as part of a program with NASA and the Air Force Research Laboratory. I tried to start a new page but you deleted it because of a lack of references. It thought I was supposed to add those after the page was created. Also, since I didn't know how to really monitor it, I didn't find out it was deleted. Can you please help me in any way to get this created so I can begin to populate it? Craig craig.kief@cosmiac.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefc (talk • contribs) 15:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

When you say talk page, I am assuming this means the link at the top next to my name that says My talk. I can communicate there as well. Craig — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefc (talk • contribs) 15:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC) User:Kiefc/Global Educational Network for Satellite Operations
 * Hi, you are correct about the talk page. I have restored your article to User:Kiefc/Global Educational Network for Satellite Operations so that you can develop it there. Please see WP:RS, WP:ORG and WP:CITE. TerriersFan (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Move
Hi again, greetings. I think Gilbert and George should be renamed Gilbert & George, but I can't do it myself. Could you oblige, please? Thanks - Rothorpe (talk) 16:38, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. TerriersFan (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, many thanks. Rothorpe (talk) 17:49, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Saint David's School (New York City), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cross-country (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) 11:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. TerriersFan (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Quill Award winners
Category:Quill Award winners, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 14:47, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear TerriersFan,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Oakfield (Hitchin) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oakfield (Hitchin) 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/Oakfield (Hitchin) 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 good 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. Derek Andrews (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Inhabited settlements
I see that you have removed my PROD on Highbury (Hitchin) on the basis that inhabited settlements are kept. Can you provide a link to this policy please? Perhaps more importantly I would question, as you did in the AfD Articles for deletion/Oakfield (Hitchin) our definition of settlement. While Highbury is part of a settlement, it is no more than a street with a few cul-de-sacs branching off. It appears to have no formal definition, unlike a ward, or parish. So do we create articles for all the other non-notable streets in Hitchin? Or even all the housing estates? Derek Andrews (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no guideline but a pragmatic standard has developed through many AfDs - see WP:NPLACE. Following that, small neighbourhoods should generally be merged. In this case my suggestion remains that you might like to merge the four constituent districts of Highbury Ward into that article to start to form something useful. In this case it does seem to be a recognised neighbourhood - see here for example. In suggesting that something should be merged doesn't mean that others should necessarily be created; I am simply dealing with what happens to be here. TerriersFan (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ban template
If think you used the wrong template for User talk:Kengi1982. He's not an IP user ;) Eeekster (talk) 02:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Doh! Thanks; now fixed! TerriersFan (talk) 03:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Shnurek
Can you please let me know on what basis this AIV report was "declined". I had taken the time to reply to comments that were left. Chrisieboy (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The history is here. Your report was declined by Admin Qwyrxian who advised that the primary concern was sockpuppetry and that the report should be taken to WP:SPI. It was later reviewed, after your objection, by Admin Department of Redundancy Department who endorsed that assessment. After your report had been up for over 7 hours, and no admin had been prepared to block, I removed it as a housekeeping edit. I would add that declined reports are prone to be removed after 1 hour so this was exceptional. If you have procedural concerns then please feel free to raise them at Wikipedia talk:Administrator intervention against vandalism. TerriersFan (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This is an obvious and persistent sockpuppet that I have taken the trouble to report. As you will be aware, the guidelines state that obvious sockpuppets may be reported to AIV. I am therefore surprised that no action has been taken by any administrator other than to remove my report. Chrisieboy (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As I state above, after reports have been declined, after a reasonable time they are removed, to avoid AIV being backlogged with declined reports. If you are concerned by the actions of the declining admins then please raise those directly with them; if you have a general concern that no admin has been prepared to action your report then raise it at the Project talk page. TerriersFan (talk) 23:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was raising my concerns with you as the admin that removed my report rather than blocking the sock. I was not sure that the others had declined rather than commented. Anyway, it is listed at SPI. Chrisieboy (talk) 00:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Order of Thelemic Knight
My name is Gerald del Campo. I am the CEO of The Order of Thelemic Knights, which apparently had a page on Wikipedia that was taken down in 2011. I have just become aware of this.

On the deletion page some one noted that our non-profit, tax-exempt organization is a "blatant hoax" as if the organization didn't exist. As the CEO of this organization, which works along side of The Red Cross and *many* other charities, I take exception to this (as would the IRS) as it doesn't appear as though the editors who reviewed the page took much care in researching it. Furthermore, there are articles on Wikipedia itself that reference pages written by our members on our website. We also do a fair bit of publishing, which can be verified with a quick search on Amazon.com - we are listed as a non-profit organization by the Oregon Secretary of State, where our headquarters resides. Quite frankly, I am disappointed that an organization that does the sort of work we do would be so easily blown off by your editors with so little research. The subject matter "Thelema" is subject to great political bias and manipulation by some Wikipedia editors who are members of a supposed competing organization. If you allow that sort of manipulation to continue, Wikipedia will no longer be a source of unbiased factual information.

I am asking you to reconsider reversing the decision to delete, and perhaps spend a little time understanding the sort of work that we have done, and continue to do for the greater good in the name of our chosen spiritual paradigm. Please forgive, I am not familiar with the mechanics of writing there, and I simply don't have the time to learn a new language. Standard HTML would have been very cool since most people already know that. :)

The Oregon Secretary of State URL. Simply go to http://egov.sos.state.or.us/br/pkg_web_name_srch_inq.do_name_srch?p_name=ORDER%20OF%20THELEMIC%20KNIGHTS&p_regist_nbr=&p_srch=PHASE1&p_print=FALSE&p_entity_status=ACTINA

A copy of our trademark filing: http://it.zibb.com/trademark/order+of+thelemic+knights/29900971

Another: http://www.trademarkia.com/logo-76205557.html

Here is a link to a newspaper who mentions the work we did on behalf of a battered women's shelter. http://www.salem-news.com/articles/may122008/bradley-angle_5-12-08.php

You will see that we do in fact exist.

Here, we are mentioned for the work we do with battered women. http://altreligion.about.com/b/2011/01/03/how-important-is-a-prophet.htm

Our Church (The Thelemic Gnostic Church of Alexandria) is listed as a jurisdiction at the North American College of Gnostic Bishops. http://www.nacgb.org/member_jurisdictions.html

Guidestar.org http://www2.guidestar.org/organizations/93-1275678/order-thelemic-knights.aspx

Charity Blossom http://www.charityblossom.org/nonprofit/order-of-thelemic-knights-portland-or-97280-gerald-del-campo-931275678/

Manta http://www.manta.com/c/mrytqrx/the-order-of-thelemic-knights

All over the place, articles written by our members serve as sources for other articles. Here's an example at New World Encyclopedia: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Fran%C3%A7ois_Rabelais

Thelema for Beginners web site: http://sites.google.com/site/thelemaforbeginners/home/12-thelemic-organizations

A podcast where I was interviewed about the Order of Thelemic Knights: http://www.podcastdirectory.com/podshows/350343

We are also registered with GoodSearch.com. http://www.goodsearch.com/nonprofit/order-of-thelemic-knights.aspx

And we are listed as a Thelemic Organization on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelema

Here we are at Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/185-2501330-7856453?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Order+of+Thelemic+Knights&x=0&y=0

This is archived permanently: http://hermetic.com/beastbay/984636406/

http://thelema.tribe.net/thread/f3109071-ef15-47a2-86a2-a2cfd59ca76c

http://egnu93.wordpress.com/bishops/united-states/tau-apollonius/

We are referenced on many books searchable at amazon.com

While it is the policy of the Red Cross NOT to post organizations they work with on their web site, we do have a pile of letters from organization thanking us for our assistance during emergencies like Hurricane Katrina, where we provided security services. Please contact me with any questions you might have. I could even arrange a phone call if you prefer.

Once again, thank you for your time and effort. If I have made any mistakes here, allow me to apologize in advance for them.

Sincerely, Gerald del Campo CEO Order of Thelemic Knights — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solis93 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello, thank you for your courteous approach. Your page was deleted as a result of the discussion at Articles for deletion/Order of Thelemic Knights. Importantly, the reason for deletion was failure to meet WP:ORG; there was no suggestion of it being a hoax. I have restored the article to User:Solis93/Order of Thelemic Knights to enable you to develop it. Before you work on it, please familiarise yourself with Your first article, WP:ORG, WP:RS and WP:CITE. In particular, many of the links that you have helpfully cited do not meet WP:RS. You also should take full note of WP:COI. TerriersFan (talk) 00:42, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your kind response and direction. It looks like I have a lot of reading to do. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solis93 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Vibrational Medicine
I reverted out your changes because you referenced a page which did not exist and you deleted my merge proposal without discussion, let's take this to the talk page. --Salimfadhley (talk) 16:07, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Moment of pause
About this edit, I'd imagined that this is something we have in common and unspoken, eh? Cheers~! -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your gentle note but probably not.:-) I was just undoing a batch of likely non-constructive edits by a blocked IP and I have no interest in the subject. Sorry. TerriersFan (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hell no, apologies for the confusion... I don't mean to say that we're queers~! *lol* On the contrary. Anyway, the photo in question might be of some questionable Public Domain value since it states the photographer is the BLOCKED COI-editor who happens to be the "organizer of the event" but inside the article page, its been mentioned that they had volunteer photographers. Thus, this photo's PD value is now in question. Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:51, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Did I mentioned that I have a secret admirer/stalker/impostor who likes to follow my edit sometimes? That last hoohaa here must have been the poor bored and/or begotten soul again... other than that, no harm done. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 17:17, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have checked on Google and the image doesn't appear elsewhere and the rather poor quality suggests that this is not a professional photograph. The block on the uploader doesn't invalidate the original licence. The image adds significantly to the article so, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, my inclination is to treat it at face value and leave things be. TerriersFan (talk) 16:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Rogereeny~! -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

IP Vandalism
Hi, your edit in the page to report vandalism seems to have removed the IP that I reported. Did I do it wrong?--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ignore or delete this section. I assume they are removed after blocking.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Correct. This noticeboard is very high traffic so actioned reports are removed immediately to avoid other admins spending time on them. Best, TerriersFan (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Latin music IP vandal
Hi, I added some evidence to flesh out the AIV entry, to clarify why he should be blocked. Please check out Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism one more time. Thanks in advance! Binksternet (talk) 21:19, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and semi'd Afro-Cuban jazz. TerriersFan (talk) 21:40, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 21:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Blocking
You're very fast! I was literally seconds behind you and I thought I was fast!! :p--5 albert square (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd also taken time out to check that it was a dynamic IP before gong for the short block :-) TerriersFan (talk) 21:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Unprotect double redirect
Hi, would you mind unprotecting Positive Futures Network so I can fix the double redirect? Thanks! Night Ranger (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I have sorted the double redirect. TerriersFan (talk) 19:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you. Night Ranger (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Help please
Would you mind taking a look here? I did a bad revert and apologized. Did not get a good response. Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, not a problem, I'll put a comment in that may help but perhaps leave it to me for a few minutes so we are not both commenting on the same issue? Best, TerriersFan (talk) 22:55, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Now commented on your talk page. TerriersFan (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Jerry Sandusky
I saw that you blocked the school IP that was adding the gay category to this article, but he appears to be back as. I reverted him again, but thought I should let you know. Calabe1992 23:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks; that's most helpful. I notice that User:140.254.227.55 has just been blocked by another admin, User:Materialscientist, who I have alerted to the situation. TerriersFan (talk) 00:29, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, thanks. :) Calabe1992 00:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Lol! Thanks; that's cheered me up! TerriersFan (talk) 20:01, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Biographies of living persons
Feel free to duplicate this invite on the pages of others who have commented, for or against. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

3RRN edit
Hi, you undid a change I made to the 3RRN posting, but your edit summary didn't include a reason. I made the change because the 4th revert lists me as a proven sockpuppet, but the admin making that statement originally (User:NativeForeigner) altered his decision to note that I wasn't socking (see here, here and here). Thus, linking the 4th revert to an IP address with the note "(SPI #1 result"Definitely were socks")" is factually incorrect - I was not sockpuppeting, did not use an IP address to revert the page, and the admin who made that statement said several times that it was a mistake. I didn't strikethrough blindly, I included the relevant diff showing that the admin since changed their conclusion, and included a note to explain my edit - this was the most transparent way I could find to indicate that the 3RR report was based on a fundamentally incorrect assumption. I can't think of another way to indicate that the 4th revert (on both occassions) was not me and that the original conclusion was based on an admitted error, and without making such a change, the report itself is misleading, essentially wrong (as in, there were three reverts, and an edit war - but I did not make a fourth revert and I did not use an IP address as a sockpuppet). Bittergrey has had a chance to modify the report    and has not taken it. I would like to replace my edit, or have the 3RR report in some way reflect that I wasn't sockpuppeting, if you believe there is a better way then I am happy to listen - but I would strongly prefer that the page not make the erroneous claim that I used a sockpuppet to game the system. Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 14:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not keen on users, who are the subject of reports, striking through an aspect of the report. I suggest adding the following comment:
 * "In the light of NativeForeigner's comments here and here, would the closing admin please strike through the 4th revert from the 203. from the April 1st set, and given I wasn't socking and the second SPI is not yet closed, the 4th revert from the April 20th set should probably be struck as well."
 * That effectively gets across your position. Hope that helps. TerriersFan (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, done. You didn't specify the position, but I put it right below the 4th revert url, which makes sense to me since you'll see the comment right after the list of diffs.  Thanks.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 18:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's fine. TerriersFan (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Since I've been mentioned by name here, I'll point out that my plan was and is to update the list once SPI #2 was done. Until then, we don't really know anything relevant. (No action was taken in response to SPI #1, so its only relevance is to set that stage for SPI #2.) Since Drmies has already written "I think we're done here", frequent updates seem pointless.

WLU, I was patient with you on my talk page for some time after you deleted my comment from your talk page with the justification "or I can just delete this without reading it". You can become welcome on my talkpage again by answering one simple question. Omitting these facts from your criticism of me here was fundamentally dishonest.

Now, since debates between WLU and myself only seem to end when I give him the last word (or write that I'm explicitly giving him the last word) I'll not comment further here. BitterGrey (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

About TAXI - The Global Creative Network
Hi TerriersFan. I see that you posted a template for speedy deletion of my recent article TAXI - The Global Creative Network. I have added some further information to it - and please, be so kind and consider another aspect (as shown on the Talk page): there are a lot of other articles that use references to the website http://www.designtaxi.com as references. This means that DesignTAXI does have relevance by itself, thus I consider that the article deserves being kept. Best regards, --Fadesga (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, please see WP:WEB. What is needed is some indepth coverage, in reliable sources, discussing the site itself. TerriersFan (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Woodleigh School
Thanks - a breath of fresh air - that does look much better. isfutile:P (talk) 22:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad you like it; happy to help. :-) TerriersFan (talk) 23:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I second Tony's statement - I came to the article this morning expecting to have to do a ton of work to it, only to find a nice-looking, well-referenced, neutrally-phrased, consensus-based page in its stead. From AfD to a potential GA candidate in 24hrs - I reckon you're owed one of these:


 * Good job. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 07:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 14:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Many thanks; much appreciated! TerriersFan (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem! --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:33, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

blocking of phobosrocks
i see where you blocked User talk:Phobosrocks. however you might want to consider this diff  Slowking4 ⇔ †@1₭ 18:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Seyitahmetmrk
You blocked User:Seyitahmetmrk as a vandalism only account, but as far as I can see not one of their edits are vandalism. Could you elucidate or the reasoning? I don't think that was a justified block at all. CMD (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed I did and it is open to the user concerned to appeal; which he has not. You said "as far as I can see not one of their edits are vandalism". OK, let us look at the last edit which was here. He made an unsourced change from 538,000 to 1,250,000 whilst leaving the text as "Samsun is a city of about half a million people". To take just one independent source see here. Why is this not vandalism? TerriersFan (talk) 01:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That change is based off the 2009 Turkish census, shown on websites like this. I think it's quite easy for someone to change a figure and miss the need to change the text at the same time. It's not vandalism because it doesn't fall under Vandalism, as it was not "a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". CMD (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As you are aware changes must be reliably sourced; if the user for whom you are making representations agrees to reliably source his future changes then I should be happy to unblock him. TerriersFan (talk) 01:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm quite aware. I'm also quite aware that making unsourced changed is not vandalism, and neither is it a blockable offense, especially not for new users. Seyitahmetmrk should never have been blocked in the first place, and has not even been informed as to why their edits weren't acceptable. Why was Seyitahmetmrk blocked anyway? Were they reported to a noticeboard somewhere? They should be unblocked until they actually do something that's blockable. CMD (talk) 02:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * He was reported at WP:AIV. Much vandalism consists of erroneous factual changes. I am wondering why you are debating this rather than the user themselves? Anyway, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and unblock him but a future admin might view matters differently. TerriersFan (talk) 02:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well that was quite simply a terrible report. I've found the report in question, and the user who reported it knew that the users edits actually did come from a source, and clearly doesn't understand the vandalism policy. I've encountered and reverted quite a few vandals who insert blatantly wrong statistics, but this was not a case of that.
 * I'm debating this because I saw a new user make changes which under WP:AGF are in no way bad, only to have them accused of vandalism when they clearly didn't commit any, and then be blocked on the basis of this accusation. That should never happen, and it's why guidelines like WP:BITE exist.
 * I'm going to remove the warnings from their talk page, as they are both clearly totally wrong. The user made neither test edits or vandalism. I'll replace that with a note adding on to what you've said already. I welcome any admin to look at this as it stands now, and inform me of any basis on which this user should've been blocked. It was a bad vandalism report, so I'm not blaming you or anything. Thanks for unblocking. CMD (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, it looks to me that we've worked around to a decent solution and we can move on. Thanks for your cooperation. TerriersFan (talk) 11:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We will see. But this looks more on a protecting a friend. And in the mean time mr CMD is personally attacking and discrediting me, here and on the talkpage of Seyitahmetmrk. Night of the Big Wind  talk  17:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Conversation continued at User talk:Chipmunkdavis. TerriersFan (talk) 16:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Double Redirect of Bedroom Boom
An article/redirect you protected has ended up in Double Redirects section.Since I'm not authorized to edit/fix this page and may end up breaking something, I request you to fix it or take any other necessary measures.


 * Bedroom Boom →‎ U.nited S.tate of A.tlanta →‎ U.S.A. (United State of Atlanta)

Sorry for the trouble and Thanks !


 * trunks_ishida (talk) 03:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. TerriersFan (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Blue Ribbon Schools Program
Hi--I recognize that I am in a potential conflict of interest situation. However, nothing I wrote is not included in the public record, easily accessed at the Department of Education's website. I can provide links for descriptions of the program and eligibility criteria.

I apologize for deleting the criticism. Please reinstate it, if you feel it is valid. Obviously, I don't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizg (talk • contribs) 18:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your courteous approach. I don't have an opinion on removal of the criticism section beyond that we need to get a consensus first. Meanwhile if there are factual inaccuracies, please go ahead and refix them. Best, TerriersFan (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Good morning. Thank you for understanding about the factual errors. I will correct them (and nothing else). Liz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.127.192.226 (talk) 14:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC) It looks like the copy now reflects the changes. I look forward to the discussion of program criticisms. Many thanks, Liz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizg (talk • contribs) 15:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Undoing redirects
Hi, I noticed this and wanted to be totally clear that editors are not under any obligation to discuss before redirecting a poor article to a more notable target. If you are going to effectively recreate articles, will you also take responsibility for making them conform to WP:V, WP:N and our other policies? --John (talk) 22:43, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed, "editors are not under any obligation to discuss before redirecting a poor article to a more notable target" but any objecting editor is equally entitled to revert such a bold move and then WP:BRD applies. Also, I feel under no obligation to meet "If you are going to effectively recreate articles, will you also take responsibility for making them conform to WP:V, WP:N and our other policies?". Simply because an editor has chosen to redirect a substantial number of articles puts me under on obligation to drop everything I am doing to source them up. Having said that, as you will be aware, I suggest that you might find it hard to find many other editors who have sourced as many school articles as I have? With regard to Grange Primary School, I might not have objected if you had carried out a proper merge rather than a redirect. For example, why did you not include this source? Best, TerriersFan (talk) 23:13, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll take that as a "no". If that source is the best your search for sources can uncover, I fear the article will have to be merged and redirected again in a few weeks. --John (talk) 23:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not what I said but if you wish to misrepresent my views then I have no interest. "If that source is the best your search for sources can uncover" is a straw man. I used this major achievement as an example of what you have apparently failed to consider in your redirect. I would also add, again, that there is a big difference between a merge and a redirect. "I fear the article will have to be merged and redirected again in a few weeks." would be a breach of WP:BRD. If "in a few weeks" you wish to do either then you need to seek talk page agreement.TerriersFan (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you; much appreciated! TerriersFan (talk) 23:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

your comment on AFd
hi, would you mind if I use some words from your comment here at Articles for deletion/Psg public schools in my future comments at afd. you were precise and said exactly what was needed --  Ð ℬig  XЯaɣ  08:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, no problem but I would be inclined to paraphrase so that it doesn't look too much like a copy! Best, TerriersFan (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * surely I will, but as the crux will still be the same so thought of discussing this first. --  Ð ℬig  XЯaɣ  13:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's thoughtful, thx. TerriersFan (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you; much appreciated! TerriersFan (talk) 20:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Uh...
This isn't an account, it's an IPv6 address, so it shouldn't be indeffed.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2602:306:252E:B239:C5B8:9799:59BC:2FC3
 * Oops; thx; replaced with 3 day block. TerriersFan (talk) 22:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Question and Assistance...
Hi, my article on Northampton Futsal Club was deleted by yourself and i'd like some clarification as to why and what I can do to get it back up to a standard acceptable to staying up please. You can reply privately to my talk as I suspect I will have many follow up questions. Thanks. DynamyteD (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DynamyteD (talk • contribs) 20:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Your article was deleted because it did not make any credible claim of significance or importance. Existence, alone, is not sufficient. If you wish, I will restore the article to your user space where you can develop it. However, I suggest that you familiarise yourself with WP:ORG first. In particular please note that "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." In this context, related websites, social media, YouTube, blogs etc are not reliable sources. TerriersFan (talk) 20:42, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi TerriersFan, yes please restore it to my user space so I can work on it over the next few months or so. As it is a sports club I guess it would be better for it to feature more prominently in Official circles before creating an article for it....say in the league organisers websites? Any idea if I can contact you directly in future so you can review it and inform me if it is worthy of release? I feel it best to tread with caution rather than blindly release again DynamyteD (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have recreated your page at User:DynamyteD/Northampton futsal club so that you can work on it. For an article to survive it will need more than official mentions. Significant coverage of the club (more than just reporting results etc) in national or regional media, or a futsal magazine, titles or awards etc are the sort of things that you will need to source. Taking it cautiously seems the right approach. When you consider WP:ORG has been met I should be happy to take a look. TerriersFan (talk) 01:07, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

why did you delete the norway in the eurovision song contest 2013 talk page
it doesnt make any sense because norway will participate in the eurovision song contest that year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 21:45, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I deleted Talk:Norway in the Eurovision Song Contest 2013 because it is not permissible to have a talk page unsupported by an article page. You may, if you wish, create Norway in the Eurovision Song Contest 2013 but unless you include some reliably sourced content it risks being rapidly deleted - see WP:N. TerriersFan (talk) 22:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Could you bring back my Marty Elias page?
I didn't know it would get deleted so quickly. I'm working with him currently to get his page up to date with his information and history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDA204 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, the entire content of your deleted article was: "Marty Elias worked for WWE and currently works for EWF.".
 * It is important that you address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marty Rubalcaba in your rewrite. TerriersFan (talk) 22:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will but how do I get the page reopened? Do I write up the article and send it to you? What steps do I need to take next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDA204 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have created User:TheDA204/Marty Elias to enable you to develop the page in your user space. Useful guidance is at WP:FIRST. Please do not move the page back to article space until it meets WP:BIO. Useful guidance is also at WP:PW. TerriersFan (talk) 23:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

User:TheDA204/Marty_Elias is this good to be published now? —Preceding undated comment added 20:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, far from it, you need to back all the facts with reliable sources - go to WP:RS and WP:CITE. Also you need to meet WP:N. TerriersFan (talk) 20:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Rangers FC Dispute
I am uncertain of how Wikipedia works with regard to disputing information. I have noticed that a number of entries relevant to Rangers Football Club have been altered by mischievous supporters of other football clubs, particularly Celtic. I tried to reinstate some entries to their original truthful state but these were again "vandalised" and the edit tool blocked. Such amendments made by such people is childish in the extreme and belittles the usefulness of Wikipedia. I removed one recent entry which listed "Newco Rangers" as if it was a new club totally removed from Rangers FC. I have now apparently been "warned" by someone because I attempted to remove nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCDBigBear (talk • contribs) 14:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The first place to discuss your concerns is at Talk:Newco Rangers where you should strive to reach consensus. However, if you continue to try to force your views by making large-scale content removal, without consensus, the end result will be a block.TerriersFan (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Rangers FC club dead or not". Thank you. -- Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 16:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Be Warned - Rangers FC - an attempt to push through a controversial 'same club' approach
Hello. You have contributed to the Newco Rangers article so I thought yuou should be made aware that an attempt is being made to undermine this article by pushing through a 'same club' approach despite many of us believing this is heavily biased and very selective use of the sources. You may wish to follow what is proposed at the Talk:Rangers F.C./sandbox2. Spiritofstgeorge (talk) 12:46, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:World Chess Network (v 19.5, screenshot).jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:World Chess Network (v 19.5, screenshot).jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Soccerbase
Hi there - I see you've added the Soccerbase link to the article on Sean Morrison. We actually have a template for Soccerbase links which should make it easier in future - see soccerbase. Useage is simple -. If you need any help, let me know! Regards, GiantSnowman 16:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Please take another look.
Hi TerriersFan. I've just come across a long standing edit war at Nude Records and upon looking into it noticed this post and others made by to AIV. Whilst I know that it wasn't vandalism being reported, I'm a bit baffled how you could have read that note and not thought to check the history of the article to see what was going on and then noticed that potentially libelous material was being added again and again. I'm sure this was just a mistake but I felt I have to let you know about it so that you can hopefully take action if you see something similar again. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 00:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I would have checked the history but I have had another look, as requested. It is worth noting that, as stated on AIV, "this page is intended for reports about obvious and persistent vandals and spammers only" and, as you acknowledge above, this was not vandalism. At AIV we take swift action against obvious vandals; more complex cases are referred elsewhere. Admittedly, the dispute was potentially defamatory and unpleasant; but what it was was a content dispute (the basis on which I see you have locked down the article) and it is not the role of AIV reviewing admins to judge the accuracy of content. That was the basis for my comment and the submission was removed by an uninvolved admin here. It needs to be borne in mind that the AIV submission was on the noticeboard for nearly 3 hours and none of the many admins who would have reviewed it were prepared to block nor suggested an alternative course of action. On reflection, a suggested referral to WP:AIN might have been a better recommendation, in view of the history, but there was no mistake. TerriersFan (talk) 01:51, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to have a go at you (I'm more annoyed at the general failure of our administrative structure in this case) but to me it is even more perplexing that you checked the history and didn't take any action. Sure it's not the 'job' of admins at AIV to deal with content disputes, but it was fairly obvious that the user was not used to our procedures and was being affected by content that was in the article. As such BLP bells should ring and even if you didn't have time to deal with it then dropping a note somewhere else would seem sensible. Although we're all volunteers, being an admin does bring with it a certain level of responsibility. In an email the user sent me today it is apparent that this was causing them real distress and your inaction helped to continue that. I should probably go rant about this somewhere else too as the fact that so many admins saw it and did nothing is frankly shocking. I'll shut up now, but if you come across a note like this again, please imagine being in the users' shoes. (Our 'job' can suck a bit can't it!!) SmartSE (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Richard O'Dwyer
Hi, season's greetings! Fancy protecting the above? Rothorpe (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Semi-protected for two weeks. TerriersFan (talk) 02:38, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Rothorpe (talk) 13:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And it did the trick nicely. So I'm back to ask if you'd move John Keating (musician) to Johnny Keating, please. As first mooted in 2010. Thanks! Rothorpe (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Moved. TerriersFan (talk) 23:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! Rothorpe (talk) 23:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Bhaskarachandra
Thank you for giving my article some fresh air though it is still suffocating under the stench of a deletion tag. But now I understand how much a deletion tag can grasp the attention of generous users and thus revive the article. Thanks anyway!!!bc-ndra (talk) 02:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!!! bc-ndra (talk) 07:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/India Channel Study
Thanks for catching that. I use User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD but I've never seen that error before. Usually it handles redirected targets just fine. I'll mention that to him on IRC the next time. Mkdw talk 03:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Lakeside High School (DeKalb County, Georgia)
Hello TerriersFan
 * Just a heads up. I have edited a paragraph (which you recently re-inserted) in the above referenced article. I realize that you didn't write the paragraph, just simply re-inserting it after another editor had deleted it. But I still didn't want to step on your toes with my rapid edit...at least not without an explanation. The paragraph was fairly wretched. Weasel words, and very old data (28 years ago, in one instance). I believe I have preserved the core concept with my edit, while eliminating the fluff. Please let me know if you disagree, and perhaps we can find some newer information to supplement the few sentences that remain. Cheers. Gulbenk (talk) 06:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's much better, thanks. :-) TerriersFan (talk) 17:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.  Thank you.
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --96.32.138.125 (talk) 00:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;"
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!

File:Sampledutchg.jpg
Think you're right, tried to restore but got an error message Error undeleting file: A non-identical file already exists at "mwstore://local-swift/local-public/archive/6/67/20070909025434!Sampledutchg.jpg". Any ideas how to remedy it? NtheP (talk) 19:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC) The more I look into this the greyer the area gets and I think deletion may be correct but I can also see that there are differing views. There are numerous questions asked about product packaging at WP:MCQ e.g. Media copyright questions/Archive/2011/October and Media copyright questions/Archive/2007/May. There's also the text at commons:Category:Beer cans, the image deleted does contain a logo where the copyright status of that logo is unknown and I don't think it's de minimis or too simple. The image was correctly labelled with regard to the image itself but needed a FUR for the product in the image (as suggested by the addition of the Non-free product cover template and that was the basis for my decision to delete. Happy to discuss further. NtheP (talk) 21:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Gedhun Choekyi Nyima
Dear TerriersFan, I noticed that you helped with the image of the missing girl Madeleine McCann. I had some difficulty in filling out all of the boxes to upload a non-free image of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima who is a young Tulku (almost to the level as H.H. The 14th Dalai Lama) he has been 'missing' since the age of six. Perhaps in your effort with Madeleine's image you offer advice or assistance in the smooth uploading process of Many thanks. Fountain Posters (talk) 00:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Javelin (band)
Hey, I noticed that you deleted Javelin (band). I independently created a link to it on the Javelin disambiguation page, but I noticed that the page had already come and gone. You said you didn't see evidence of importance. The band's been around for 7 years, have played over 200 concerts, have released 4 albums , and have had reviews written about their albums [drownedinsound.com/releases/15357/reviews/4139878].

So please undelete that page so I can see the history and improve it. Thanks. 76.126.140.195 (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This was an expired Prod on which I took no view other than no objection was raised within the requisite 7 days. If you create an account I will userfy the page to enable you to improve it to try to establish notability but I cannot userfy to a dynamic IP account. TerriersFan (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This is my real account. I'd rather like to see the history of that page, and userfication won't help me with that. Userfy it if you want, but I'm very confident I will be asking you to undelete the page before I recreate it. It would be easier and more courteous if you would just do that now instead. Thanks Fresheneesz (talk) 16:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and please respond here, but it'd be nice to have a note about your response on my talk page. Fresheneesz (talk) 16:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I got it undeleted. I and the rest of the community would appreciate it if you give people (even those without accounts, as I looked like) the benefit of the doubt. There is also policy around undeleting pages when they are contested (even past the 7 days you mentioned). So do wikipedia a favor and allow reasonable people to improve it. Fresheneesz (talk) 16:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Another inappropriate deletion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bob_Carter_(voice_actor)&action=edit&redlink=1

People brought this to my attention as they were attempting to find more information about me since I've been nominated for several Anime Awards. Please restore your deletion and do more research (Google Search or IMDB Search or contact me personally if you have questions) next time if you have concerns regarding verification. Thanks for your assistance and consideration! Respectfully,

Bob Carter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cartergame (talk • contribs) 11:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Glendale Academy protection
Hi TerriersFan, I see that you indefinitely full protected Glendale Academy after some edit warring in January. Do you think that the full protection is still needed? Would you be willing to switch to semi-protection or unprotect? Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Blue Ribbon schools in the United States
Category:Blue Ribbon schools in the United States, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 04:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Demetri Goritsas for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Demetri Goritsas 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/Demetri Goritsas 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 notice from the top of the article. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Favorite betrayal criterion
You may be interested in Deletion_review/Log/2014_March_19, as you have commented in prior deletion discussions related to this article. Homunq (࿓) 02:06, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Central Trains.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:48, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. – xeno talk 15:03, 11 June 2014 (UTC)