User talk:Koavf/Archive040

Hitchens/Packer interview on Orwell
Hi - I was working on some of my C-SPAN lists, and I came across this interview, which I just watched for the first time. You may have encountered it already, but if not you might want to; I bet you would find it interesting. KConWiki (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks I know that BBC are having a month of Orwell, but I didn't know that us colonists were joining in, too! —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually this one is from a few years ago (as evidenced by the presence of the late Mr. Hitchens) but I just happened to watch it forr the first time recently. KConWiki (talk) 12:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks
Please consider the article List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks. I mentioned my comments on Articles for deletion/List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks. Thanks. --Inbamkumar86 (talk) 11:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Military aircraft of World War II
Category:Military aircraft of World War II, 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. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Interview today
Justin,

This is Jeremy Foote - the researcher from Purdue. I'm hoping to confirm that we are still good to go for an interview this afternoon. Please forgive me if this isn't the correct place to hold this discussion. -- Jdfoote (talk) 16:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

La Güera photo correct license
Hello Koavf, how are you doing? I write this lines because I have some problems with. I had to upload it with a generic attribution license (CC BY 2.5) intead of a Spanish attribution license (CC BY 2.5 ES), because when I tried to put the latter, it appears as if that type of license doesnt exists. Could you give some help? Thanks and regards, --HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Fotolar Is the origin of the photograph from the Fotolar blog? If so, it can be uploaded to Commons... —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, as all the photos contained in that blog are made by that person who owns the blog. Finally, I had uploaded hours ago to Commons, with no problems (until now).--HCPUNXKID (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Atom Heart Mother
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Atom Heart Mother. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. In this specific instance, you are reverting changes without leaving an edit summary or conversation on any talk page such as Talk:Atom Heart Mother or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pink Floyd. Other editors cannot understand why you are making these changes, and because they violate a previous consensus, they are inclined to revert them, provided no edit warring occurs. You have also been making similar disruptive edits on The Dark Side of the Moon, which have also been reverted. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   09:16, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * Chronologies Per Template:Infobox album and WP:ALBUM, album chronologies are supposed to go in one unbroken chain for an artist--that is the consensus. Pink Floyd aren't somehow exempt. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The first link states "Exceptions may be appropriate for artists with very complex discographies which may warrant more than one chain." The second is a project page and doesn't appear to contain anything to support your views. Please could you create a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pink Floyd so this discussion may have a wider audience, thanks. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   09:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Exceptions How/why does this warrant an exception? This isn't (e.g.) the Grateful Dead who have over a hundred albums all with byzantine release histories. If you want a lot of feedback, don't post to that narrow project talk, but a larger one like WT:ALBUM. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you know the correct procedure to get a wider consensus, you should point editors to the specific discussions, not blind revert. Let's work together, not at loggerheads, thanks. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   09:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Consensus There is a consensus. Two users can decide anything at a project talk page--how/why would that be a trump card against several users over the course of years contributing to a much broader project? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You seem to very keen on loudly asserting a consensus - now can you point me to specific discussions so I may read and evaluate them, thanks. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   09:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Chronologies consensus Search. E.g. 1, 2, etc. And the template documentation was changed to reflect this. Again, you've ignored my straight-forward question about why Pink Floyd would be exempt and I notice that you've also chosen to not chastize Parrot of Doom for doing the same (and worse) than me, so it seems difficult to me to believe that you're really interested in my perspective as much as you are interested in bickering with me. Can you please explain why Pink Floyd is a musical act that would be exempt from the plain language of Template:Infobox Album? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

It will take some time to read through those discussions, but just to clarify, my disappointment over your activities is with you edit warring with poor edit summaries, nothing more, nothing less. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   10:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Edit warring Which is fair, but the point that I made previously is that you are selective in your disappointment and I would like to know why. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not important anymore. The edit warring has stopped and we've moved onto (hopefully fruitful) discussions. To be precise, I'm not fussed one way or the other on this, just as long as we discuss first, then edit. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   10:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah So it was important at some point? This is one of the things that's truly maddening about trying to work here: when I am expected to justify my behavior to the nth degree, even if it's applying a very simple and altogether non-controversial standard to a handful of articles, while other users flat-out refuse to answer simple questions directed to them. I would believe your argument if you had more (apparent) equanimity. Something along the lines of "Justin, you shouldn't do that, and Parrot, you shouldn't either". (I say "apparent" as it's possible that you've chided Parrot off-wiki, but it frankly seems unlikely.) Instead, I just get someone demanding things of me and not being charitable enough to provide the same in return. I imagine that my questions directed to Parrot will fall on similarly deaf ears while I waste my time acquiescing to what both of you ask of me. This is more-or-less what I come to expect with every dispute here. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel that way. All I can suggest, and it works well for me, is that I try not to spend too much time on here and go out walking, roadtripping or spending time with my family. Give that a go and hopefully you'll see things in a calmer atmosphere. Be cool. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   10:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure It's hard to argue with that advice. Thanks. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

RE: Discussion
No problem. Could you do the same at this discussion about article layouts? The two revisions in question are the current, original layout and another editor's revised layout. The discussion has gotten kind of ugly, as I've fallen victim to having to repeat myself, and we could use a fresh, objective perspective from an experienced editor. Dan56 (talk) 09:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Ethereal wave categories
you replaced my category with one with "wave" capitalised. music genres aren't capitalised Lachlan Foley (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually You replaced my category, which is against process. Just ask for the main article to be moved, then the categories can be renamed easily. Doing it out of process is probably a bad idea. As far as the renaming goes, it probably won't pass though, since New Wave music is capitalized. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:41, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Appalling POV merging by Emmette Hernandez Coleman of Flag of WS/Flag of the SADR. Thank you. —Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

8th anniversary
Don't forget to award yourself the Master Editor III service award on your 8th anniversary. (Seems to me it should be Vanguard Editor instead, but what do I know.) —&#91;  Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 18:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually I edited anonymously before I had a login, so I'm a little further along than that... —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Collaboration on audio and subtitles - late reply
Hi. I personally appreciate your offer of collaboration between usability, accessibility, and volunteers working on subtitles and such. Good idea and approach. I wish I had the time to get engaged in this project. It may not happen soon, but I believe there is bound to be a time where people will collaborate on subtitles in the way you offered. Cheers, Dodoïste (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks It seems like an obvious blind spot to me, but I've moved on to other things now myself. Let me know if you find the time. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Tagging articles
I've seen how you are active at tagging articles with WikiProject templates. I was wondering if you would be similarly interested in doing the same for WikiProject Pakistan as there are an awful lot of Pakistan-related articles, categories and templates that need tagging. You're help would be appreciated in that regard. But I similarly understand if you are not interested at this point in time or are too busy. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem I'd be happy to help--I'll do some right now. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. Much appreciated.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Kalahari Surfers
I disagree with you on the categorisation question. I decided mainly on the basis of Ghits and no objection at talk to merge the two articles which previously existed and consolidate a decentish article at Warrick Sony. But the bulk of his work has gone out under the Kalahari Surfers moniker so that is the proper title for the cat, imho. I do agree with the two article renames you did; would you consider in future changing links to the new title if you make a page move like that? Cheers, --John (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Since you took part in Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 7
I have nominated Category:Current national leaders for undeletion at Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 6 you may be interested in taking part. Ryan Vesey 23:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of
I removed it because it is a blatantly pointless template that should be deleted already. It takes less effort to simply type in the duration, and templates have also been known to slow down pages more than plain text. I am nominating it for deletion. Lachlan Foley (talk) 00:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Green (R.E.M. album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The One I Love (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) 11:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of F.C. Indiana


The article F.C. Indiana has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 *  templates has been added to both article F.C. Indiana (Men's) and F.C. Indiana (W-League) as there is only 2 articles in this disambiguation page. Thus, this page is useless now.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Hz.  tiang  02:04, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

wow!
hi Koavf, I am really really impressed by the huge number of edits you have made to Wikipedia in your time here. It's absolutely astounding! how long have you been a member of Wikipedia to get all these edits?Are you an admin by the way? Please reply on my talk page. thanks.Hyper obese guy (talk) 04:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Live Smashing Pumpkins.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Live Smashing Pumpkins.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 06:02, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Dharmic writers
Category:Dharmic writers has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. Yworo (talk) 08:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Girls (TV Series) promotional poster
I'm not sure what is wrong with File:Girls Season 2.jpeg. It has been listed because of an invalid FUR (what is that?) This poster, like thousands of others on WIkipedia has the same license and description/summary as all the other posters so what is wrong with it? - DONALDderosa (talk) 17:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * FUR All non-free media (such as this promotional poster) need to have a fair use rationale. This one simply shows Lena Dunham's face and can easily be replaced by free media. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * So what can I do to fix this? What is the difference between this one and the season 1 poster? They are each the promotional poster for each season, regardless of who's on it. I'm just still confused as to what is wrong. - DONALDderosa (talk) 24:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair use It can be pretty confusing, granted. Let's take a step back: why did you upload those two posters? (Also, if you would prefer to IM considering how it's faster, that would be fine by me.) —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no clue how to IM on Wikipedia. But anyway, the reason I uploaded the poster was to show what the season 2 promotional poster looked like. - DONALDderosa (talk) 13:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * IM I meant with an IM service, like Skype, Google Talk, etc. We could use the IRC channel if you want. Anyway, the season's poster is copyrighted--HBO owns that image. If you want to use it here on Wikipedia, you have to provide a fair use rationale: why is this piece of content that they own legally acceptable to be reproduced here? In the case of the season one poster, you could make a case because it shows the whole cast all at once. The season two poster on the other hand, just shows Lena Dunham's face and there are several freely-licensed alternatives that you can use instead. We need to provide a strong justification for each instance of non-free media (that is, audio, images, and video that are under copyright by someone else) and the rationale that you just want to show the poster isn't a very strong one. This is potentially tricky and extremely important, so I will happily help you sort out any issues related to fair use as best I can. Don't get disheartened! —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic#Move?
There's a discussion you might be interested in at Talk:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic. I'm telling you this because you were involved in Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara and/or Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Confusing edit
I added the talkheader to the talk page of the Talk:Universalist Church of America because I fleet all talk pages benefit from having this kind of friendly reminder to Wikipedians about the proper use of a talk page. But after talking a closer read of the usage section of the page for this template, I know see I may have been a bit zealous in adding it. I will restrain myself in my future use of this template. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. --Devin Murphy (talk) 15:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Why I think you're a horrible editor
I was going to leave a message for you expressing my distaste for your editing "skills", but you showed why far better than I possibly could.

"The design of the characters and how they changed for this episode could be discussed critically, but this image is not used for that purpose anyway."

So, you admit that the image COULD be adapted to fit the page and thus would completely fit the non-free rules. But, you decided that deleting the image is far more important than having a good encyclopedia. In short, rather than a) Suggesting to me (or other Simpsons editors) that we fix the image, which you admit could be used "properly" or b) fixing it yourself, you decided to instead nominate it for deletion (again) and get the 3 or 4 edits out of it.

Wikipedia is meant to be a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedia. If you'd rather be selfish and fixitated on your edit count, you should just go to a forum and stop trying to disrupt things, just to up a stat that only one person on the entire planet cares about. Wikipedia obviously means a lot to you. My suggestion is that you try channeling your skills into content editing. Find a subject you like and try to improve as many pages as you can. I think you'll find that more enjoyable than what you're doing now. -- Scorpion 0422  03:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi You certainly haven't lost any panache. You have to understand that being rude is unacceptable and even if you add in a short span attempting to seem conciliatory, that's not assuming good faith or being a decent person. Do you realize that even if a piece of non-free media could be useful, there still need to be sources to show that it is? It's not my job to justify all of the thousands of pieces of non-free media that are illegitimately used on this site which is a piece of free culture&mdash;it's the job of the uploader to show that this will enhance understanding enough to justify inclusion. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You have to remember something. Many of these images were uploaded more than 5 years ago, when the image rules were enforced differently. Not everyone has hours and hours to devote to wikipedia, so we can not be blamed for not keeping with the times. So of course many of these images are going to be out of date. Besides, I stand by my earlier statement. If you think the image could be acceptable, then don't nominate it for deletion! Fix it yourself, or if you're too lazy or incompetent to do that, ask someone. I think you've discovered that foregoing the diplomatic process and nominating stuff for deletion tends to draw the ire of editors. -- Scorpion 0422  13:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Rules The image rules may have been enforced in a lax manner, but they were substantially the same: fair use requirements were still the standard. Do you understand that the onus is on the uploader not everyone else who finds non-free media? If you can't do the work properly, how does that make me incompetent or lazy? Although an image could be acceptable, that doesn't mean that it actually is nor does it mean that it's the optimal image for that purpose. Since it's a discussion, other users could add their two cents&mdash;maybe you could find an even better image. You're evidently not interested in that, though. I've explained to you several times why a free encyclopedia is a better thing than a non-free one, how to be civil to others, assuming good faith, what fair use is, and how these processes work so I find it hard to care when you get mad about someone doing what should have been done years ago. You have had four months since I mass-nominated Simpsons-related uploads (almost all of which were deleted) to check your non-free files and ensure that they conformed to the law, policies, and guidelines. If you can't be bothered, that's not my fault&mdash;you should have done it years ago when you uploaded them anyway. I don't know what you think is supposed to happen when you come to my talk page as a belligerent and rude reactionary, but one thing that won't happen is me having a change of heart about non-free media, realizing that I'm an awful editor, and then respecting your point of view so much more. Do you understand that? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I don't have as much time as I like for wikipedia so I can't always fix things you think are important. You can drop the "Holier Than Thou" attitude. Your understanding of the policy is basic at best. You're in it for 2 reasons: 1) To up your edit count and 2) Revenge. I think there are some useless template talk pages you can go edit. -- Scorpion <sup style="color:black;">0422  19:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Policy From what I've seen, you are a rude and hypocritical person. I've never done anything to you other than suggest for deletion things that should be deleted. You can take it personally or you can act more mature and collaborate on a free encyclopedia. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cherry Red albums
Category:Cherry Red albums, 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. — sparklism hey! 08:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, pretty sure I didn't need to template you, of all people - Twinkle did it for me. Anyway, you're obviously welcome to join in the discussion. Thanks! — sparklism hey! 08:57, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Neil Young
Thanks-- I noticed you removed the frames on the two Neil Young photos I uploaded a couple of years back...  SMOOCH! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 12:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Question about your reverts
I've been organizing the category trees, and I'm stumped by why you reverted the edits to Category:Pacifists by religion and Category:Righteous Among the Nations by religion. If you would take a look at Category:People by religion, you can see that I was trying to organize it into two sections. Would appreciate some insight into your actions. Thanks. --Funandtrvl (talk) 23:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorting Why sort with space and asterisk? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's just a matter of preference. The space sorting is for categories starting with "People by" and the asterisk is for the somewhat secondary categories that start with "... by religion". Do you think there should be just one sorting key? I don't think that two sorting keys are bad, but I'm open to hearing why one sorting key is preferable. Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sortkeys I'm not opposed in principle to separate sortkeys myself. Do you know of any similar examples? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Category:Buildings and structures in the United Kingdom uses 2 sortkeys, as does many other categories that I've run across, too. --Funandtrvl (talk) 20:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Western Sahara CoA
Could I have a favor? HCPUNXKID and I seem to have had a bit of a misunderstanding. He made this edit and left this note on my talk page. and as you and he are both pro-Sahrawi, I think it would really help if you could step in.

On a related note, if you think that article should be moved, you should probably say so at it's RM, otherwise your opinion will probably be ignored. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * CoA I want to see where this deletion discussion goes first. Simply put, there should be a single venue for all of this discussion. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk • contribs) 20:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Unilateral acts by Emmette Hernandez Coleman
Hi koavf, as you know more than me of WP rules and noticeboards, can we do something to stop the unilateral acting of Emmette Hernandez Coleman? She is doing what she want on WS articles, even claiming that a consensus supporting her personal opinions had been reached, something totally false.
 * PD:I have more WP issues (uploading images, new infoboxes, etc...) to talk to you, can we exchange e-mails, or something to have a private conversation? Regards, --HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Help with genre warrior?
I'm having trouble communicating with an IP over his genre changes to Are You Experienced. He continues to remove my messages to him, claiming harassment, and refuses to comment on the content, instead slighting me in his edit summaries. Could you help in any way? Dan56 (talk) 19:07, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure I think that an admin would probably be a better bet, but I can help if you can't get any traction from one. Let me know. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The IP has promised to contact an admin if I "harass" him again. Just noticed that he reported me (good luck to him :) ) Appreciate the response. Dan56 (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Your edits to are you experienced
Hello, I'm 75.65.123.86. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —Preceding undated comment added 19:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail
Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:11, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is User:Omar-toons reported by User:Emmette Hernandez Coleman (Result: ). Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk • contribs) 00:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail
Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Albums arranged by Donovan
Category:Albums arranged by Donovan, 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. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 06:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject U2 invitation
Hello! This message is to inform you that WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!

You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

–p joe f (talk • contribs) 11:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Mark Knopfler
J- would you take a look at the first photo (not counting the infobox) in Mark Knopfler's article? It seems to have s watermark on it, but in Commons it appears to be fixed. ???? Thanks. BTW I didn't forget to contact your emsil- I've also been busy. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Watermark I don't see it. Try to purge the page and the file... —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Template:Persons allegedly associated with terrorism in the "War on Terror" who have lived in the United States listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Persons allegedly associated with terrorism in the &. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Persons allegedly associated with terrorism in the "War on Terror" who have lived in the United States redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Drmies (talk) 02:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Check
Hello, please check Aron H, I feel the notability not established. thanks Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 06:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Help
O.K. so I behaved good, no threats... Yet I get blocked for something else! Can you please comment here?--Mishae (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited West of the Moon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dulcimer (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) 14:21, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for providing such detailed advice to my students for their work on the Postcolonial Feminism article. Please let me know if you would have time to comment on any additional pages from my class. Our course page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Program:Rice_University/Poverty,_Gender,_and_Human_Development_Section_1_(Spring_2013). Students are working on final revisions now so would need quick input. Additionally, perhaps you would be willing to be an online ambassador for a future class. Please let me know. DStrassmann (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Article feedback
I was puzzled by your posting until I figured out that you had volunteered as an online ambassador for a section of my course. (There are two sections and another professor is the primary instructor for that course.) A large number of my students had contacted one of the other ambassadors who had volunteered prior to the semester beginning (so we had listed his contact information on the syllabus). We also have three campus ambassadors, but they are not as knowledgeable as online ambassadors typically are. Initially only one student contacted the other ambassador, but after telling other students how incredibly helpful he was, more began to do so. It was clear that they felt more comfortable contacting someone they knew. I hope to learn from this and advise students to contact an online ambassador far earlier. I work hard to train my students, but there are always some that have more trouble with it. If you are willing to continue for the fall semester, I will be teaching "Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities," and would love for you to be an online ambassador. For the present, there is one student I'm especially concerned with (contributor to Educational Inequalities in South Sudan). I am sending her some comments off wiki; of most immediate concern to me is that the article is orphaned and her sources are not as extensive as I ask for. However, if you have time to send some constructive suggestions in the next day or two, it would be great. Thanks again so much for all you do, and I look forward to working together in the future. DStrassmann (talk) 14:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of A City With No People


A tag has been placed on A City With No People, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. A Wild Abigail Appears!  Capture me.   Moves.  01:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Album infobox
Hi. Could you add your two cents on this issue regarding the infobox album template? You seem to be more familiar with the WP:ALBUMS wikiproject. Dan56 (talk) 21:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Album redirect to discography
Hi Justin. I see that you've created Dave's Picks Volume 6 as a redirect to Grateful Dead discography. The album was a red link before, from Dave's Picks Volume 5, and also from the discography itself. I'm thinking that it would be a lot better to have it as a red link, rather than a redirect. The main reason is that red links are an encouragement to editors to create the article. That can be a big plus, especially in cases like this. Also, since there's a link from "Grateful Dead discography" to "Dave's Picks Volume 6", the former now has a redirect to itself. I therefore suggest requesting speedy deletion of the newly recreated redirect. — Mudwater (Talk) 09:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Red links The simple solution is to just write the article really. When would you recommend having a redlink versus making a redirect? (As an aside, I'm sorry that I didn't add catseealso to Category:Jerry Garcia Band albums; that was a stupid oversight of mine.) —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:09, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd be open to further discussion, with you or with other editors, but really think that in general album titles should not redirect to discography articles. Instead they should be left as red links, to encourage other editors to write those articles.  In cases where it's clear that an album is not notable enough to have its own article, it should just be de-linked, but that doesn't apply in this case. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Notability Are the Dave's Picks albums notable? Do they have sources? I doubt it, honestly. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * They're definitely notable and they definitely have sources. And I would very much strongly prefer not to get into a debate about that, if it's okay with you.  Let's keep this question more general, please. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've taken the direct approach and created the Dave's Picks Volume 6 article. Very good.  Thanks! — Mudwater (Talk) 11:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

List Peer Review for Dan Savage bibliography
Please see discussion, at Peer review/Dan Savage bibliography/archive2. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:12, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Dan Savage bibliography
 * List Peer Review for Dan Savage bibliography

Thanks much
Thank you for your kind comments, at Peer review/Dan Savage bibliography/archive2. Much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Puerto Rican Spanish
Out of curiosity, why did you add the "Languages of Puerto Rico" category if it was redlinked? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It should exist We have languages of Pondicherry, the United States, the United States Virgin Islands, etc. I sometimes don't make the categories but that's only because I have limited time. It's blue now. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Shinto in popular culture
Hello, Koavf. You recently removed a comment/notice and no-edit-section magic word from Shinto in popular culture. You commented, "This page isn't about Ameratsu anymore and it really works better as an editnotice." I copied the comment to Shinto in popular culture from Amaterasu Omikami back in 2009, but I think all mention of Ameterasu could be removed without changing the spirit or intent of the comment. Some kind of notice is, I think, necessary because many editors add shout-outs to their favorite manga or movies that are really unrelated to Shinto except in using the name of a deity. I added the magic word earlier this year so that editors would have to edit via the main "edit this page" tab and not miss the comment.

If you would create an edit notice, that would be fine with me. I think some notice is necessary, though. Thanks, and happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 06:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Done See Template:Editnotices/Page/Shinto_in_popular_culture. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Cnilep (talk) 06:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Redirect or keep?
I'm kind of torn between redirecting and keeping an article. The article in question is Honky Tonk Woman (album) and since I'm not overly familiar with music notability arguments, I thought I'd ask a second opinion. I'm leaning towards redirecting it to Holt's article until it gets a review or two since it seems to be a little too soon for an article. What is making me question things is that she and her daughter have performed a song from the album on Ellen's show. Other than that the coverage has been mostly about the album, but it's also very light and was also a little general at times. I seem to remember you doing a lot of stuff with music, so I thought I'd ask your opinion on this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect I can't find any sources that discuss this album critically. Until at least Allmusic posts a review, I'd recommend redirecting--but make sure that you keep the categories at the redirect and when you copy and paste everything into the main article, list the contributors in the edit summary. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

American novelists
You have created a mess at Category:American novelists by mis-interpreting the CfD. The CfD said that we should not split out to specific, by gneder sub-cats. I had split out all the people through the end of B and beyond to specific, by century sub-cats. No where was there a decision not to do this. Now we have Category:American novelists only having females before the end of B. This was never how it was meant to be.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, OK, I guess you are doing the same for the contents of Category:American men novelists, but you don't need to do it when the people are already in by century sub-cats, and really not if they are in by-genre sub-cats.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Merging I agree that it is wildly unnecessary, but how am I misinterpreting: "The result of the discussion was: The result, by a fairly large margin in both numbers and arguments, is in favor of merging the categories back together at Category:American novelists, while keeping the women novelists seperate Category:American women novelists because it is a recognized field of study in the literature."? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It is because if you think something is "wildly unnecessary" it probably is. What the decision means is that being in Category:American women novelists should not exclude the contents from Category:American novelists.  However if they are in non-gendered sub-cats of it, they do not have to be in the parent cat.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay But everyone is from some century, therefore you are proposing that Category:American novelists become a container category. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am. It already has had a disperse call on it, but only once we decided on the by century did we start actually getting there.  So are you going to reverse everyone you did?  I started on it, but if you are using AWB, you will probably get it done sooner.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Doing it I am in the process if you check my contributions. If you want help after that, I would be happy to assist. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This sounds like a workable plan. It will take a long time.  There are several articles that you need to go find more information to confidently say what century they belong in.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Justin, just as a tip - there is a huge thread at ANI about whether this is or isn't a good thing to do. JPL has been diffusing by century, I've done a few (not many), but was dragged before ANI as a result. You can do what you like, I'm just giving you warning that some here feel that diffusing this category is in violation of consensus (I don't agree, but just giving you fair warning). --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:02, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, no one has yet put Category:20th-century American novelists or any of its sister cats up for deletion or other action at CfD. I do not really see the complaining about this amounting to anything.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks I appreciate the heads-up. This is exactly why working here is like banging my head against a wall. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * yeah but at least the pay and benefits are good, right? --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 11:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I mentioned you at ANI
Here. I think you're doing the right thing by adding Category:American novelists back in, by the way. &mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

American novelists
Some people seem to be trying to turn Category:American novelists into a holding category for people who they deem especially notable novelists, at least that is the effect of their very specific returns of people to the category (although at least they are leaving them in century specific categories). I was hoping explantion of this would work, but some editors seem to be dead set on keeping it that way, and I wanted to avoid an edit war. Since in one of the four cases, Ann Bannon, you had at one point removed the parent cat, I thought you might want to weight in on it. I made comments on both that article's talk page and on Stephen Crane's talk page.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

cat removal
You are quite correct, sorry for reverting you. Might be helpful to include a comment about why a cat is being removed, especially on controversial topics. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem I have a lot to do and I sometimes gloss over edit summaries. Of course, the payoff is that sometimes I have to take extra time to explain myself. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:American scientists of Ukrainian descent
Category:American scientists of Ukrainian descent, 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. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2013 (UTC)