User talk:KTC/Archive 9

Can you please help me with this page submission. Thank you
Can you please help me with this page submission. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludopedia (talk • contribs) 15:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

RfC discussion of Paul Krugman at Dispute_resolution_noticeboard
I call to your attention an RfC discussion of Paul Krugman at Dispute_resolution_noticeboard

I'm sorry, I think I failed to invite you to the discussion when I filed the RfC. If you notice any other potentially-interested editor that I also failed to invite I encourage you to do so. Deicas (talk) 21:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Krugman "Endorsement of the potential issuance of a trillion dollar coin" dispute should be occurring in one, and *only* one location.
At the moment there is overlapping discussion on "Endorsement of the potential issuance of a trillion dollar coin" occurring both at the RfC and at. Is there a way to persuade/compel all parties to confine the discussions to the RfC until the RfC is closed? Deicas (talk) 03:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Rfc and Reporting against User:Aminul802 for edit war and Personal Attack
Dear KTC, I'm terribly attacked by User:Aminul802 on different pages. He is blaming on others talk page with false allegation. Please check these links Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Abdur_Razzaq_%28barrister%29, User_talk:Dreambeaver. Currently he is engageing in an edit war in this article Mohammed_Nizamul_Huq. He is not interested to discuss in article's talk page. He is just warring with me and tell other users, that how bad am I! If you check this Talk:International_Crimes_Tribunal_%28Bangladesh%29#Terrible_violations_of_NPOV, you will fiend how he is trying to bias the article. Recently in this discussionBiographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard a newly created account, named User:Tariqmia come to engage edit war without understanding wiki policy. I'm trying to explain why he is wrong and what should he do. Even I welcome him on his talk page with 'welcome' template. But Mr. Aminul claim that I bit him!! it is not very pleasant feeling for me. I'm reporting him for wp:npa. Beside this he reverted Mohammed_Nizamul_Huq article to it's wp:npov, WP:BLPSTYLE and WP:NEWSBLOG violet edition. Moreover this issue is still discussed here Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard, and not finished yet. I'm Rfc from you here Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard, here Talk:Mohammed_Nizamul_Huq and here Talk:Ali Ahsan Mujahid ‎.

If I did anything wrong, please notice me. and please take necessary steps to prevent User:Aminul802's personal attack. Thanks in advance.--Freemesm (talk) 07:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Article on PROUT
Hi KTC, I see that you removed the protection on the PROUT article. But I don't see a resolution to the problem. If I restore the last good version of the article - complete in the sense of consistency and no broken links - that is likely to start another editing war. Rather than get into that, can we not impose some system of protection or semi-protection for this article? I put in 200 hours of work rewriting the article. Reviewers from two portals elevated the quality rating of the article from Start to B-class. But these other editors want to toss all of my work in the garbage, which makes no sense at all to me. --Abhidevananda (talk) 03:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for misunderstanding, but the article still requires protection or else we are likely to end up in yet another editing war. No dispute was resolved or is likely to be resolved. Hence my request regarding some sort of protection. --Abhidevananda (talk) 03:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Image:Adam Kluger picture.png
Any reason for undeleting Image:Adam Kluger picture.png? This appears to have been taken directly from a BusinessWeek article and cropped? K7L (talk) 20:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Michael Greenberg (soccer)
How do you arrived at a no consensus on him when 4 people say delete, 1 says weak keep, 1 keep? That's basicly 4 to 2 vote to delete! Govvy (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Page that needs to be salted
You closed Articles for deletion/The Most Popular Girls in School as delete, but it has now been re-created twice in 3 days. Any chance you could salt the page? Thanks. Nymf talk to me 16:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ KTC (talk) 17:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Unblock?
I saw at WT:ANAT User talk:Starfleet officer post about their interest. If the scenario is the one described, couldn't you either reply to them letting them know it has been unblocked (since there wouldn't be a password issue) or please ask them to create another account? Just a thought in case we were getting in the way of a good-faith editor. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Malawi/Index of Malawi-related articles
Thanks for performing the move of Index of Malawi-related articles to WikiProject Malawi/Index of Malawi-related articles (revision history). This was indeed the proper discourse regarding this matter. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Hello, just curious to understand, how did the dialogue at User talk:166.82.205.115 get on your radar? (Have been assuming that unless reported to ANI, no Admin would know of it.) Thank u. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you re: Infobox papal conclave.
Thank you for your help with fixing coding at Infobox papal conclave. I was afraid someone else might be working on the issue as well, but figured I'd work on creating the template. Hope I didn't cost you too much time. :) -- JoannaSerah (talk) 02:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem at all. I ended up finally learning some template coding syntax so no time lost. :) -- KTC (talk) 02:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification of discussion
A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 22:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar!

 * Thank you, much appreciated. KTC (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Notes to interwiki bot ops
Hi KTC,

Thanks for leaving notes to bot ops. There's a discussion at WP:BON that you might be interested in, and a template at User:Legoktm/Wikidata you can use in the future. Legoktm (talk) 10:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Papal conclave, 1521–1522 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alessandro Farnese


 * Papal conclave, 1523 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alessandro Farnese


 * Papal conclave, 1534 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alessandro Farnese


 * Papal conclave, 1559 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alessandro Farnese


 * Papal conclave, Autumn 1590 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ippolito Aldobrandini

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Papal conclave, 1623 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ippolito Aldobrandini


 * Papal conclave, 1655 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Francesco Barberini


 * Papal conclave, 1667 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rinaldo d'Este


 * Papal conclave, 1676 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Francesco Barberini


 * Papal conclave, 1691 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Flavio Chigi


 * Papal conclave, 1730 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Francesco Barberini


 * Papal conclave, 1769 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Carlo Rezzonico


 * Papal conclave, 1823 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Giuseppe Firrao


 * Papal conclave, 1829 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Giuseppe Firrao


 * Papal election, 1143 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gerardo Caccianemici

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request?
Please see this diff, which appears to be an effective unblock request. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 01:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!
 WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive! The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive. There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out! Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 14:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Februarius MMXIII
Thank you KTC for your message.

I trust in your impartiality in this case and thus venture to guess that you in due course will also inform the other party concerned of the same thing you communicated to me.

For the first I have repeatedly and constantly used the talk page. The subject matter concerned was earlier discussed in the talk page and hence the "List of papabili according to news media" was added. At no time did Rrius participate in it. Later this user took the one-sided course of action and repeated it on sevreal occasions. I made several attempts to suggest that it would be good to turn to the Talk Page, but to no avail. (This is confirmed by my edit commentary and the use of the talk page)

Please be so kind and and take the same issue up with the other party concerned so as establish an air of trust and confidence. I thank you once more for your concern. Major Torp (talk) 6:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The editor misstates the situation. The heading was not amended after a conversation. The editor made a bizarre ultimatum on the talk page that there needed to be a large disclaimer on the page or the page should be deleted. Headings are not meant to serve as disclaimers, as I have told this editor many times. They are meant to be a short description of what is in the section. If there were a second list based on something other than names mentioned in the press, then it would be appropriate to distinguish. But what Major Torp is trying to do is something that should not be done. As I have also told the editor many times, if he or she wishes to challenge the article as not following guidelines, then the editor should nominate the page for deletion. Moreover, the editor's wish that the article reflect the fact that the names listed are from "media speculation" is already accomplished by the article's very first sentence. What the editor is doing has crossed into the realm of disruption because his or her goal is wrongheaded, and the proper course of action has been pointed out numerous times now. Any number of people would be happy to have the discussion with him in the appropriate forum of whether the article should exist. His insistence on a "disclaimer" in a heading is misplaced, inappropriate and disruptive. -Rrius (talk) 00:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

While your position may well be correct and will attract the support of the community if it comes up in a discussion, continuing reverting each other as you have both done is clearly edit warring. It's useless for both of you to state "go to the talk page if you disagree" in your edit summaries. Both of you need to actually take part in a talk page discussion, and to reach a consensus before editing the disputed header. I understand you are frustrated, but please take a step back, have the discussion and otherwise continue to improve the encyclopaedia. I would hate to see either of you blocked for edit warring over something so silly. -- KTC (talk) 09:43, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have. And I have even pointed out what Major Torp should do if he really, really wants to put up a disclaimer instead of having the guts to follow through with his threat to try getting the article deleted. -Rrius (talk) 09:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The other editor in question reverted again. KTC please help before we are back again in the same situation. Thank you! Major Torp (talk) 9:30, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed the problem. No more edit warring. Changed the heading to reflect it's sole provider of content i.e. media . List of news media papabili in the 2013 papal conclave. I put right the WP:NOTGOSSIP and WP:NEWSORG glitch. The topic is now an indication of it's content. Major Torp (talk) 10:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How on earth was that anything other than an escalation of an edit war? And now we have a mess of page histories that need fixing. *sigh* I have requested the assistance of uninvolved admin to review the actions here. KTC (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

First Article: Thank you!
Thank you for your message. I have reworked the "Article for creation" and resubmitted here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecoute I am new to Wikipedia, and it seems what I submitted had issues. Sorry. I hope it is all good now, it is a small, tiny contribution but this is my very first article…

Is it safe to now remove the message on my talk page, that it was not accepted at that time? Can you please help me as I do not know how to archive or remove it. My talk page can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ludopedia. Thank you KTC in advance for your help. :-) Ludopedia (talk) 10:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you KTC for your help on "Removal of comments, notices, and warnings" and "Archiving". Ludopedia (talk) 11:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Archaeology of Kosovo photos
Hi KTC, thank you for your support. I wanted to know whether the old version of the article could be reverted, and whether I can upload the images again if it is not possible to revert to the old article. I appreciate everything that you have done. Wish you all the best.--Atdheu (talk) 23:00, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Mistake
I believe you made a mistake in indenting MONGO's vote. Please take another look at the version before your change, and at this edit, where he un-strikes the word "Oppose" and puts new text in. He clearly meant to vote. Bishonen &#124; talk 20:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC).
 * Thanks for the note. My mistake, I have fixed my screw up and apologised to MONGO. -- KTC (talk) 20:49, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Dhanjal
no i have written which is the truth only — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukhjinder101 (talk • contribs) 07:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Meetup photo
Hi Katie. I've uploaded your photo of today's wikimeet at File:Manchester Wikimeet 6 April 2013.jpg (after a bit of tweaking) - hope that's OK. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike! :) KTC (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Because I'm a Maid! didn't get deleted
Heads up re: Articles for deletion/Because I'm a Maid: You deleted the page at the original title Because I'm a Maid, but I had moved it to Because I'm a Maid! which is still up.--Atlantima (talk) 22:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for advice/ help page on James Wilde (Adventurer-Explorer-Philanthropist-Author)
Dear sir or madam, I recently saw that you deleted the aforementioned page, and the comments by Sionk (which I believe were a bit exaggerated). I have tried to engage your team in understanding what is needed and was ready to supply the necessary info on notability. As this was the first article I have ever created and it existed for over two years, I had no real engagement with you all. It was only when I began work on the Global H2O page that Sionk began to attack all pages associated with it. The updates were meant to add to the topic with regards to the work that has been completed in Africa regarding Global H2O, and as well the book that was published recently. All the references are credible... The news articles in North Carolina address a large market. There was TV coverage as well, which was provided. There is sufficient news from the last week in Charlotte for instance regarding the charity and the NoDa Grand Prix. I understand that there are more than 300 people on the 7 summits list, but with that respect, I imagined that since this is less than the number of people who were in space, it is a notable achievement. As well, James Wilde will be going to the North and South Poles in the coming year, which will put him on the Adventurers Grand Slam list (less than 100). I am asking for your help please to allow me to modify the parts which you all disagree with and add references which will help you with the possible reinstatement. Happy to work on whatever is needed. I am asking for your help to correct the issues and reinstate the page. In my opinion, if going to space is notable, if sailing around the world is notable, the seven summits is also notable especially if the person was in the first 500... I will work to supply more publicity from magazines, newspapers, and television on the topic, if you will please allow me to access the work that was completed (so I do not have to recreate everything). Many Thanks Grendel93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.223.157.232 (talk) 07:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

A request
Heyya,

Have submitted a presentation proposal for Wikimania 2013. Found that you too were interested in attending the same.

My submission can be found here. Please sign at the bottom of the page therein as a possible attendee if you feel that the presentation would be worthwhile.

undefinedDebashisM Talk 05:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Oxford Meetup 5
I'm sorry that you couldn't attend the fourth Oxford Meetup. We have decided to hold the next Oxford meetup in one month's time, rather than two, so that it falls within Oxford term-time. A page has been created about the fifth Oxford Meetup; please sign up if you think that you are able to attend - if the date or venue are unsuitable, please comment at its discussion page.

Please spread the word to anybody else who you think might be interested. The next UK meetups are at: Glasgow; London; and Nottingham, all on 12 May 2013. -- Red rose64 (talk) 08:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, just a reminder (because some people haven't seen the geonotice) that the fifth Oxford Meetup is this Sunday. Are you able to attend? It would be great if you could come. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there, thanks for your message and reminder. I would love to visit Oxford sometime as I've never been before, but unfortunately I won't be able to attend this weekend. On the WMUK side, User:Jonathan_Cardy_(WMUK) is looking into if he would be able to attend. Hope you get lots of people and everyone have a good time at the meetup! -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 09:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * for responding. -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Jonathan Cardy did attend, thanks.
 * It has been pointed out to me that 7 July 2013 collides with Coventry 8, who have a prior claim to the date. Since nobody has (yet) claimed 14 July for any UK meetups, I have decided that Oxford 6 should be held on 14 July 2013, and not 7 July as previously advertised. In this way, those who wish to attend both may do so. I hope the revised Oxford date is convenient for you; and if it isn't, why not give Coventry a try? -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:51, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject AFC needs your help... again
 WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive! The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive. There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Delivered at 13:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC

Listed buildings in Wales
Fantastic re-organisation which looks great and is full of really useful information. Two thoughts: we seem to have lost the links to the pages on individual buildings, e.g. I can't get from the Troy House entry on the Grade II* Listed buildings in Monmouthshire page to the Troy House page itself. Secondly, the ordering of the entries. Is it done by HB number? I wonder if this is the best, most accesible placing? I don't think the HB numbers are very well known, I'd certainly never heard of them. Would simply placing them alphabetically be better? Do let me know if I can do anything to help. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

More on listed building templates
Hi again, I've been doing some more on Grade II* listed buildings in Somerset and its sub lists but it is slow going - approx 1,000 still to do! I saw some of the work you had done on Wales lists - which I presume from the speed is using some sort of script from the EH spreadsheets. I have a few questions/comments re format but wonder if you could do a similar job for the Somerset districts & then put them in a sandbox (happy to use mine) & I will copy them across & do some tidying up (adding links, pics etc).

Using Grade II* listed buildings in Carmarthenshire as an example...
 * The building & location (parish) could be wikilinked - presumably this needs to be done manually.
 * The grid ref is given to 8 figures - most places I've seen recommend 6 places
 * Doesn't the HB number link in the same way that the EH listing number does?
 * Do we need to copy across the "notes" column?
 * Some are in upper case and some lower case - which seems strange.
 * Sorting - which is the best column to have as the default I would suggest alphabetically by name

When WLM takes place will it only be for sites which do not currently have a photo or can "better" photos of the same sites where we already have some pics? as I've been going and getting them from Geograph.

Sorry for so many questions. If you could do the Somerset ones with your script and put them in a Sandbox I would be happy to do the tidying.&mdash; Rod talk 18:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Also I still think there will be problems with trying to apply the template to those county lists of GI buildings which already have FL status eg Grade I listed buildings in Greater Manchester, Grade I listed churches in Cumbria, Grade I listed buildings in Bristol and all of the sub sets of Grade I listed buildings in Somerset + Listed buildings in Runcorn (rural area), Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area), Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde, Listed buildings in Rivington, Listed buildings in Widnes, Grade I listed churches in Cheshire, Grade I listed buildings in Coventry, Grade I listed churches in Lancashire, Grade I listed buildings in Maidstone,Grade I listed churches in Greater Manchester and Grade I listed churches in Merseyside which all have slightly different formats?&mdash; Rod talk 19:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * One other point.. I'm slightly worried about the data quality on the EH spreadsheet eg Birnbeck Pier is described as a bench!&mdash; Rod talk 19:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)