User talk:Kudpung/Archive Aug 2013

Dear Kudpung, I kindly request that you please restore a page that you deleted: "Soulaymane Kachani" (WB:PROD July 23, 2013). The page was not well structured, was lacking references and some links were not working. If you restore the page, I will edit it and it will hopefully conform to your standards. Thanks in advance for your consideration. Columbia Faculty (talk) 13:48, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Kundpung, I'd like to request you to restore a page deleted by you named 'Esab' at 12:42, 22 August 2013. I need to work on it more and it will be helpful for the concerned community. Please restore the page. User (Talk) 20:13, August 23, 2013 BDT

Dear Kundpung, I can only apologise for the lack of content included in the page created however I am uncertain what I am doing with it and thus have failed to use an references. I will attempt to do so but would be grateful if you could restore the page in the interim. Many thanks --213.160.100.5 (talk) 09:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC) Paul.

Jupiter
Sorry for polling. The edit hasn't been reverted, So it appears to be alright. I won't do any more polling. I'll leave a message on the article talk page instead.-- Anderson   I'm Willing To Help  22:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Your thoughts?
As you have been quite active in the field of RfA reform, you might like to take a look at a rough draft I threw together at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Adminship RfC sandbox. Regards, AutomaticStrikeout ?  00:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * i've had a quick look at it. I'm not quite sure where you would like to go from there, it seems to be a summary list of every thijng that has alrady been discussed over the past couple of years. Note that no proposed changes have ever succeeded, but that is possibly due to users misunderstanding the purpose and goals of Wikipeda RfC discussions. I'll be happy to discuss more when I get back to my office computer and my regular account. . --KudpungMobile (talk) 05:02, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay. I got the idea from a RfC to define the CheckUser role at Wikidata. To me, my RfC draft seems to get right to the point instead of requiring participants to do a bunch of reading. However, it might need to have some more parameters added regarding the removal of adminship. AutomaticStrikeout ?  18:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Nothing to criticicise but it comes very hard on the heels of the series of RfCs launched by  earlier this year. Because it is always the same people who contribute to discussions on admin stuff, there is a risk that they will begin to tire of too many recent RfC. However, as an RfC, it will fail because it  addresses too many  issues in one Request For Comment. This is characteristic of Wikipedia discussions and that is why the current RfC on AfC, for example, has ground to a standstill. The participants will be spread around so many alternatives that there will not  be sufficient quorum for  any of them - bear in mind that a ´´singlé´ proposal RfC of this ilportance that will change just one of those major policies will need at least several hundred participants. Thete is also the fact that if any one of these proposals woul need a tweak to  the site software to enable or disable n'ew user rights and/or tools, the Foundation can and will veto any community consensus as it  deems fit. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you think I should try narrowing down the alternatives, perhaps to only discuss either term limits or de–adminship? AutomaticStrikeout ?  00:27, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The best RfCs are the ones that  only address  single topic and leave little scope for forking.  That said, I still think this comes too hard on the heels of the recent round of  RfCs on admin reform. That's why I have one RfC draft  waiting  in my  sandbox. May be you  would like to  check it out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I was aware of it, but now I've read it through. I like your RfC draft. When do you plan to go active with it? AutomaticStrikeout ?  15:47, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure. There have been a couple of recent discussions about similaŕ stuff at WT:RfA and WP:BN so I thought that I would at eqst wait until the dust has settleled. I will point  out  that  my RfC is strictly  designed to be only an opinion sounding discussion rather than a formal proposal to gain a consensus on the proposed idea. I believe in testing the waters berfore wasting community time - every wasted edit  on a discussion  could have been a new addition of content to an article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Well, I think you could probably run it now. Then again, you know much more about the RfA environment than I do. AutomaticStrikeout ?  14:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Mazurek Dąbrowskiego move
Hi Kudpung! Could you please move Mazurek Dąbrowskiego back to Poland Is Not Yet Lost? The latter is the consensus from the most recent move request where a conclusion was reached. I have let User:Rzuwig know that he can then open a new move request per WP:BRD. — Kpalion(talk) 07:58, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Urgent: Date for Wikimedia Asia meeting
Hi! Thanks for expressing interest in attending a Wikimedia Asia meeting. We are urgently trying to decide whether the meeting should be held at 17:30 on Friday, 9 August, or Saturday, 10 August. Please indicate whether you are free on one or both of that dates in the |table on this page (scroll down if necessary) by 12:00 noon (Hong Kong time) on Friday, 9 August. This will help us decide which date suits the largest number of people. Check to find out the confirmed date. Thanks. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikimania
It was good to have a long talk just now as you were top of the list of Wikipedians that I had hoped to meet at Wikimania. Hope to see you again... Andrew Davidson (talk) 06:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I feel both humble and privileged. Hope to catch up with you again soon. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:53, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw you got the first seat on the first coach away from the beach party - smart work. It reminds me of an article I did on sweatworking.  The main benefit of that is "the shared experience of suffering was effective in establishing a bond"! :) Andrew Davidson (talk) 15:02, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This is Crisco. Sorry I didn't say goodbye earlier, but I had to get moving ASAP. At airport now, when I get back to Indonesia I'll try and get a list of editors from various ASEAN nations who may be interested in what we discussed.218.188.81.226 (talk) 00:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you and rest assured
Hi Kudpung,

I just wanted to thank you for granting me reviewer rights and provide you with an assurance that I too am here to build Wikipedia, not delete it. If you take a look at my public log, you'll see I regularly mark new pages as reviewed. I'm also working on an article in my user namespace at the moment. Kind regards, -- Forward  Unto   Dawn  09:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:List of social networking websites
I've. What do you think? -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:45, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * OK. Question is, will  it  work? I  have recently  gotten into  the habit  of placing  reminder templates on  the page because slow archiving  means that  people just  don't  look at  the pagetop  notices. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikimania Hong Kong
Good to meet you. Hope your (considerably shorter) journey home was pleasant and that we keep in touch. Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Good to meet you  too, Jon. Catch up  with  you  again  at  the very  latest in  London  next year. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

User Talk Archiving
Hello, as per your objection here, i have started archiving my talk.Thanks. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 20:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It wasn't  an objection. It  was really  an observation  and some advice, but  it's important  if you  are going  to do  work  that  will invite comments on  your talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

IP user 46.171.197.14
Greetings Kudpung. I am concerned with the edits made by IP user 46.171.197.14 The individual has most lately been active on article Thermonuclear weapon. His or her edit history appears to have an unpleasant focus on personalities from history whom the IP identifies as Jewish. The edits made appear to be problematic in their intent. I have approached you because you are a well-respected admin, and may know the best approach to adopt. I sense trouble with this IP if he/she continues with this problematic choice of topic and editing style. Cheers Irondome (talk) 21:46, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Having  reviewed the article histories and the user's editing  history, I  share your concerns. In  a purely  technical  article, the religious and/or ethnic relations of the scientists are irrelevant unless it  is proven that such  developments were clearly  and specifically  carried out by  or on  behalf of such  a group and are essential  to  the article's content. The fact  that  three of the developers shared a common  belief or ethnic origin is no  more coincidental  than if they  had been, for example, French or Buddhists. If  the insertion  persists, I  would recommend starting  a discussion  on  the article talk  page (which  has seen no  movement  for a long  time) and if that  does not  help, requesting semi protection of the article. As it's a static IP it's highly  likely  that  all  edits from  that  address are from  the same individual but  I  would hesitate before expressing  any  concerns on its talk  page, while nevertheless keeping  a watchful  eye in case a clearly  identifiable POV can be established. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the detailed and thoughtful response. I already have the page under watch, and I notice another colleague has voiced our shared concerns on the users talk. I hesitate to directly confront this however, apart from making regular editorial amendements. I fear my self-control and manners would collapse under the strain of interacting with a possible racist with a POV. I have no wish to be banned. I have many plans here to help out. So I will leave it for the moment to fellow regular editors whose common decency and clue I have the deepest confidence in. Thanks and cheers! Irondome (talk) 23:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * User:46.171.197.14 just added a long rambling antisemitic screed on Talk:Thermonuclear weapon in which he agreed to stop pushing his POV on that page for fear of being banned. However I wouldn't be surprised if he continues inserting antisemitic comments on other pages; his POV is pretty clear. -- Chetvorno TALK 19:58, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think any  admin  action  is necessary just yet. In  cases of inappropriate addition  of content  to  articles or off-topic comments on  discussions all users are entitled to  revert and/or make use of the catalogue of incremental cautions and warnings, a list  of which  can be found at  Template messages/User talk namespace, or in the Twinkle dropdown menu if they  are using it. In  highly  contentious issues, such  as those pertaining  to  race, religion, or politics, if problems persist that  require blocking the best  course of action  would be to  file a case at  the Administrator's Incidents Noticeboard. However, if a particular article is subject  to  disruption by  IP  users, it  may  sometimes be appropriate and much  quicker to  request  semi page protection where no  discussion  is necessary; the use of Pending  Changes is also  an option but the complexity of the issues may  escape the knowledge of the reviewers, while under semi PP, any edit requests must  be authorised by an admin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand and agree. Thanks for your advice and guidance. -- Chetvorno TALK 22:03, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for keeping me in the loop. It was as I suspected. Cheers Irondome (talk) 18:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Assessment
Hi Kudpung-- I hope you enjoyed yourself at Wikimania this year. I have not yet gone to one, but I did just check out some of Jimbo's "State of the Wiki" addresses from the past few years over the last few days. I might find myself over in London for next year.

I wanted to follow-up on an offer you made some months ago for an assessment here in your second comment. I am considering a run for adminship sometime in the next year now that I am finished with school and can focus more on my work here. I check my e-mail regularly, so you do not need to leave an e-mail notice on my talk page. Also, there's no hurry on this request, but please let me know if you are still able to do so. With thanks, I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 06:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Offer still stands. Ping me again  when you  get  nearer to wanting  to  run  because I'm  beginning  to  get  a bit  forgetful -  especially  due to  the workload I  came home to  from  Wikimania ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:51, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Third opinion?
Hi Kudpong. I got your name from the list of available trainers at NPRSCHOOL. I was wondering if you could offer me and User:Forward Unto Dawn your opinion regarding our disagreement at FUD's talk page? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 07:02, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologise for the delay  in  replying -  somehow I  missed this message. I  think  the best  solution  would be to  ask for a WP:3O. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Georgia (country) to Georgia move suggestion
Please comment here. Thanks. georgian JORJADZE 00:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

RfC Ping
Not to be a pest, but I'm quite curious as to when you will move forward with your RfC. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 22:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Which one? I have a couple on  the boil. If you  mean the admin  recall  one, I  really  don't  know. There are a couple of factors, notwithstanding  the fact  that  I'm  extremely  busy  in  RL and wouldn't  have the time right  now to  follow it through if I  were to launch it. A good success formula with  RfCs of this nature  is to  strike while the iron's hot -  at  this very moment  it  isn't. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the Bureaucrat/Admin Review RfC. I guess it is best to wait until the right time. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 22:57, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's the one. Best to  wait until  a new discussion about  it  starts up  somewhere again like at WT:RfA for example. For the time being, it's best  to  leave sleeping  dogs lie -  it  won't  go  away  though. It's interesting to  see however, that  the arbs have very  recently  desysoped someone. Maybe they're realising  it's time to  take a harder line; we'll  see. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It's even more interesting to  note that  there hasn't  been the slightest  comment  from  the community  on  that  one -  tacit agreement? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for RfA
Hi Kudpung. Can I nominate Callanecc for RfA? I believe that he can be an administrator. He has over 19000 edits, with 5900+ mainspace edits. He too has account creator, file mover, reviewer and rollback rights in Wikipedia and is a CVUA instructor. I believe that he know all the Wikipedia policies and won't abuse his admin rights. He do not have any warnings of any kind 3 months before RfA. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   14:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * We don't  usually  nominate people without  discussing  it  with  them  in  depth  first and usually  over email. I think  you'll  find that   is already  contemplating  such  a move and has asked some people for advice. You  may  wish  to  visit the very  current  discussion  on  WT:RfA  about  nominations. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I have actually asked him but he rejected my offer and said that he is not up to that at this time. But he said that if he gets nominated for RfA, he hopes that I will support him. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   15:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think  that's meant  as an invitation  to  go  ahead and nominate him. It's not  something we do. RfA is a sensitive issue and it  would not  be good to  land someone in  an embarrassing  situation  that they  do  not  feel  ready  for and which may  cloud another future attempt  at  RfA. You  may  wish  to  visit the very  current  discussion  on  WT:RfA  about  nominations. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I can see that Callanecc is rather busy, from my CVUA course that I have to nudge him several times to ask him to mark my work. I don't think that he will be prepared for RfA. He has intermittent and indefinite online times, and his status in his user page showed 'Might be online'. I'll discuss with him in depth whether I can nominate him in RfA in the next few days on email. If he don't want the nomination, I'll wait till another time then. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   15:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I really  wouldn't persist with  it at  the moment, I  think  his intentions are clear. In  fact  I'm  one of the people he's been in  contact  with. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Has he asked you any advice about RfA? ''' Jianhui67   Talk   15:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I said: I'm one of the people he's been in contact with. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

New untitled section
What is the problem with the changes to the Nick Turse page? All have relevant citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.122.88.211 (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

What is the problem with the changes to the Nick Turse page? All have relevant citations.128.122.88.211 (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but  I  genuinely  have no  idea what  you  are talking  about. Please also  see WP:TP. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Thanks, Kudpung. I appreciate it.  I've found in this case it's frequently better to let the user go without response, or have them blocked as a sock of a banned user.  Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * (That's User:Mbz1, in case you were wondering. ) Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I was wondering, but  as I  don't  know of any  proof (except  of a range block) I  have not  blocked the IP  yet. However, comments from  this IP  are now getting  out  of hand (Wikipedia talk:Banning policy) if they  are indeed block evasion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the autoreview right
Thanks again, Kudpung. :) --Qwerty Binary (talk) 10:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

CVUA
Can I apply for CVUA to get experience to become a reviewer of rollback?KinHikhari (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I think probably until you understand what user rights are for, an adoption programme would be of more help  to  you. See WP:Adopt. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Please ask one of the instructors listed on the trainers list on WP:CVUA via their talk page. I would suggest you some trainers that you might want to choose for your CVUA course.

Those instructors I mentioned are quite good. But I'm not sure where you live, so it is essential to pick an instructor that has the same timezone as you. But I still think that like Kudpung said, that you understand what user rights are for before applying with one of the trainers. The CVUA course is relatively long. Mine lasted for 3 weeks. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   14:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I've not been involved at CVUA for about a year now, sorry. And I would echo Kudpung's advice that adoption would be more beneficial than the CVUA - a more balanced and rounded programme would better help KinHikhari learn about Wikipedia. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 14:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ooh didn't know that you have not been involved in CVUA for a year. But I think that you are quite a good instructor. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   15:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

New to creating Articles... I think I figured it out now though.
Hello,

You recently deleted the page Lee Merry since it was very poorly cited. I have now fixed those and want to see if I can get the page posted. Please let me know what I would need to do to make that happen. How can I vet the page before it goes live?

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tresweet (talk • contribs) 16:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I see you  have recreated the page again and added some references. However, the page has already  been WP:PRODed for deletion  in  7 days if it  does not  meet our criteria. This is because the references supplied do  not  relate directly  to  the subject  of the article. Please note that  notability  cannot  be inherited -  that  means the subject  cannot  be notable from  their connection  to  other notable people. Referenced sources must  be reliable, but  above all,  must all discuss the subject  in depth which  these refs do  not. You  would need to  find substantial  reliable sources that  demonstrate the subject's significance and importance for an encyclopedia entry. For more information  regarding  the criteria for people please see WP:BIO and WP:ATHLETE. For a more detailed description  of reliable sources please see WP:RS. As it  stands, I  do  not  think the article would even survive a discussion at  WP:Articles for deletion and that's probably  where it  will  be sent  if the PROD template is removed. Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

User:LogX
Hello, Kudpung. I ee you have granted reviewer rights to LogX. I have developed some concerns over his tagging for CSD and was wondering if you had any insight to offer. I have left a note on his talk expressing my concern, but I'm not good at this sort of thing. Any help you might provide would be appreciated. Thanks Dloh  cierekim  23:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Dlohcierekim. Reviewer rights have the lowest entry  threshold of all  the minor rights -  indeed, a couple of years ago  it  was handed out  indiscriminately  to  to  thousands of users based solely on their edit  count. Paradoxically, NPP  although IMO far more important, does not  need any  demonstration  of prior experience. I've left  my  standard custom message for new NPPers on  LogX's talk  page. If  you  come across other problematic patrollers, you  may  like to  use it  too. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dloh cierekim  00:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission
You are invited to join the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:17, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

didja
get my emails? did i send to right email address? sats 07:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

G'day! Yes I just  did. Wikipedia email comes into another computer on  another server and I've been busy  preparing  something  (see above). take care, and I hope to  catch  up  with  you  again  soon. The food in HK was good -  shame there wasn't  enough of it! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Arctic Kangaroo at CVUA
I was looking at the list of instructors at CVUA, and I saw Artic Kangaroo on there. Perhaps he should be removed? Thanks, the  one  sean  22:17, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing it out . I have removed the name but couldn't figure out how to remove the rest of the details from the table. Perhaps you could do that and while you are about it, You may wish to check out the standing and/or activity of the others on the list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look. Thanks. the  one  sean  02:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've gone through and checked user activity. Here's what I found. I'm not linking to the reviewers so as not to cause an undue disruption, you can ping them if you want.
 * The following instructors are active and in good standing:


 * Callanecc
 * Chip123456
 * Dipankan001
 * Hahc21
 * Mdann52
 * Riley Huntley
 * Ross Hill
 * Strike Eagle
 * Thine Antique Pen
 * Vertium
 * Vibhijain
 * Yunshui
 * Shaun9876
 * Mediran
 * Cncmaster
 * Pratyya Ghosh
 * Simeondahl


 * The following instructors are inactive and have been marked as such (but not removed):


 * Floating Boat
 * Jethro B
 * W.D.


 * The following instructors have been blocked and their information has been removed:


 * Arctic Kangaroo


 * The following students are active and in good standing:


 * Hawkmist
 * Numbermaniac
 * Jianhui67
 * Solarra
 * Citrusbowler
 * Afisch99
 * Technical 13
 * Vishal14k
 * Rtucker913
 * Geraldshields11
 * Chris troutman
 * Greengreengreenred


 * The following students are inactive and have been marked as such (but not removed):


 * Suri 100 (no longer an account)
 * NitRav
 * Lee Tru.
 * Nyswimmer (no longer an account)
 * Darth Molo


 * The following students have been blocked temporarily and have been marked as such:
 * WorldTraveller101

All users who have either been marked inactive or removed have been notified on their talk page. I created a template (User:Theonesean/CVUA_inactive) for notification. I'll leave it up to someone with more experience to decide when to move the inactive reviewers to the inactive section. The raw list I used for tracking the accounts is available here:. Also, I didn't audit former students. If you need anything else, don't hesitate to ask. the one  sean  04:22, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have actually graduated from CVUA. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   06:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You were still listed as a student in the table. Want me to move you to the graduate section, or do you want to? Cheers, the  one  sean  15:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good work Theonesian Theonesean. If you  feel  up  to  it, I  see no  reason  why  you  shouldn't  move the inactive trainers to  the inactive list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks, the  one  sean  16:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * , as my trainer, has actually seem to have gone missing., do you have a replacement trainer you might suggest to complete the course?  Thanks. Technical 13 (talk) 16:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * was still editing  up  to  2 days ago. Perhaps you  should give him  a ping. Otherwise, as I  redesigned the CVUA some time ago to be self regulating, I  suggest if that  fails you  ask someone else  of your choice from  the active trainers.  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * , just shift me to the graduate section. Thanks. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   23:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Both of those things should be done by tomorrow. Thanks. the  one  sean  00:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

User:KinHikhari
Regarding your response on WP:RFP/R, he has actually asked me how many reverts to get rollback on my talk page. I told him it depends on him. ''' Jianhui67   Talk   06:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Apology
I'm really sorry for my behavior first of all! I felt that the articles doesn't have sufficient references and subjects should be deleted so I marked them for deletion. I'll be more careful on that in future. Thanks a lot for your guidance and assistance. Sorry again! --  L o g     X   13:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No apology needed :) I  was just  pointing  you  towards the guidelines and recommended instructions for patrolling  new pages. If you  read those first  before you  patrol any pages, you  should be fine. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure I will! --  L o g     X   16:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Delete User page
Can you please delete my user page alone? --  L o g     X   16:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I could, because you have requested it uncontentiously, but  why  not first  consider just  blanking  it  and starting  over? There's not  much  in  it  and I  don't  see anything  egregious,  or did I  miss something? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * In it's history, I have added some personal stuffs there. Like my name and i'm from. That's why I need to cut it up! --  L o g     X   16:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks much :-) --  L o g     X
 * LogX, you might also want to request those entries OS'd.   Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 16:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks for the information--  L o g     X   16:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Template for new articles
Hi Kudpung.. I found during NPP that many new users are using a template which starts with "Subject of my article is" to create articles. I am unable to find out the name of the template, but hope that you must be knowing. It seems that this particular template is not clear enough, as although it is written to replace "Subject of my article" with the actual subject of article. Many users are not doing that and instead they leave the text "Subject of my article is" in the articles. A recent example is Erick Arc Elliott. Can you do something about it?-- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It comes from  using  the article creation  Wizard and it's quite common -  just  as they  also  leave the image placeholders on  the page.  People often omit to  remove  the instructions in  the page code. I  don't  think  the template should be removed from  the process, but  you  may  wish  to  ask  for more opinion  about  its use and possible improvement  at  WT:AFC. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I will raise it at WT:AFC. In the past two days I have seen this on 5-6 pages. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung
I wanted to thank you for following up the talk we had at Wikimania and for alerting me about the rfc. I am impressed by the depth of research you have put into the rfc. I hope we can keep in touch. Cheers BO &#124; Talk 15:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think  there's a lot  of good that  can come out of this, but  many  of the posters on  the RfC need to  take things a bit  more slowly. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I will  be emailing  you  (because it's long, rather than avoiding  transparency) in the next  couple of days to  outline something  I  think you can help  us with  and which  you  might  enjoy  doing. It  hinges on  the discussions we had with  Brandon, Eric Möller, and Steven Walling. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Request for Rollback Rights
Hello! Being encouraged from your comments stated on my last request for rollback rights, I've done lots more reverting and has been doing more reverting focusing on vandalism as stated on your comment/observation. I have a good grasp of what is vandalism, have read policies on vandalism, about rollback, looked & reverted clear cases of vandalism, content removal and many more as stated on my previous request. EuroCarGT 00:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

My previous request: [|My previous request]

I'm not sure if this is the correct place to ask for user rights but on Rollback it says you could ask any admin.


 * Your recent reverts are all  legitimate but  are not  all  for vandalism. I notice also  that  some clear cases of vandalism  have been reverted as 'good faith  edits'. Nevertheless, I've granted you  the use of this tool, but  please remember that  Rollback must  only  be used for clear cases of vandalism. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Howdy!
Thanks a lot for your kind message on my talk page. I'm currently sorting through orphaned WikiProject:Med articles and I've seen some which I don't believe meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Am I correct if I then mark them with tag to the page? I realise I initially tagged about ten articles with PROD without providing reasons, which I've since done. I since reverted and added a reason to 3-4 PRODs which were removed because I didn't provide a reason, but in the future I will use the tag. Is this the customary way to behave? Kind Regards + thanks again for your gently-worded message, LT90001 (talk) 10:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I suggest you  use Twinkle because it does most  of the work  automatically  for you including  notifying  the creator -  but  that  may  not  have much  sense if the creator is a n SPA and is long  gone away. You must provide a reason, and that  reason  should cite the appropriate notability  policy  or guideline which  the article does not  conform to, such  as for example: Does not  demonstrate significance or importance and further research  fails to  reveal sources to  support  WP:GNG. I  know that  sounds a lot, but  that's the way  it's supposed to  be done, especially  per WP:BEFORE, although I  know we all  hate to  do  the work  of lazy  creators. That  said, do  read WP:DELETION, WP:PROD, WP:CSD, and WP:NPP -  you'll find most  of your answers there. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

User "Mike willaims" circumventing his block using sockpuppets and IPs
Hi Kudpung! I would like to make you aware (if you aren't already ;-) of the fact, that user:Mike willaims (Saikat Nick Barua), who has been blocked by you recently, is circumventing his block by creating several sockpuppets and continuing to edit as before under a number of (semi-static?) IP addresses. One of the socks has been blocked already, but the other sock and the IPs are not, nor is any of the articles affected still semi-protected. This user's editing behaviour has not changed over the course of months, and basically he's spamming us since 2011 now. I have summarized the accounts and IPs I have isolated as clearly belonging to this same editor as well as a list of articles affected in this edit. If you find the time, please investigate the case. Thanks. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm already  aware of it. See my  comment  on  the Willaims talk  page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Requesting your assistance in making this CfD more public without canvassing.
Hey, I was wondering if you could help me spread " WP:CfD/2013 August 28 - Category:Wikipedians by gender and subcats is something everyone should read. The decision to participate is all yours and I don't care one way or the other if you do or don't and if you do I don't care if you support or opposed. I'm only posting this here so that you will be aware and take any action you deem appropriate. Thank you. " to an evenly split group of possible keeps and delete !votes. I think it is something that most everyone should be aware of, whether or not they participate, and I don't want to be accused of canvassing. I've already posted it on WP:VPT and WP:VPM Thanks. Technical 13 (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#A proposed tool for reducing backlogs
You are invited to join the discussion at Village pump (idea lab). APerson (talk!) 17:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

TY
Thanks for deleting Herpetic gingivostomatitis prior to the move, much appreciated, Lesion  ( talk ) 20:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion is requested at Talk:2013_Ghouta_attacks#Photo
Would you please weigh in to the discussion at Talk:2013_Ghouta_attacks? Thoughts on an appropriate venue for discussion would be awesome, as would your opinion on the photo itself. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Already seen and done ;) That  said, my  own thoughts on  the horrific photo itself would be irrelevant  as I  do  not work  at  Commons where any  discussion pertaining to its eventual  deletion  would take place. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ta. Sorry, I didnt want to burden you, but when I think WP prob resolutions, I increasingly think of you. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 01:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The issue of semi-protecting the article has come up also. It has been swamped with IP stuff, much of it unsourced POV OR nonsense. There is a danger that regular contributors may be inadvertently hit by 3RR in their frustration. I started a topic and 3 eds including me, support. Could you? If you agree with the above points only of course. Irondome (talk) 01:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've done what I  can in  an attempt to  defuse without  throwing  my  block or protection  tools around. The advice to  everyone is there. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

2013 Ghouta attacks
Can you please vouch for semi-protection on this page, the sheer number of ips vandalizing and pov pushing is astonishing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#2013_Ghouta_attacks_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Cprotect.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29

Sopher99 (talk) 02:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of the problem, but as I've intervened already (see the thread above), I  think the best  step would be to  ask  for page protection  at  WP:RPP and let  an uninvolved admin  do  what's necessary. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kudpung. Regards Irondome (talk) 21:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

semi?
Guidance_for_younger_editors Semi protection is excessive for a page that has had like only three or four non autoconfirmed edits this year. NE Ent 02:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It's only for a month and bearing  in  mind the sensitive nature of the page, the semi  should provide an additional  didactic message. If you  have admin  tools and would like to  change it  I  won't  argue, but  as far as I'm  concerned, I  think  it's appropriate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Notability of softwares?
Hi Kudpung, what are the notability criteria for softwares? I came across WP:NSOFT, but that is an essay. Specifically can you examine this new article Hi slider. The subject is a new software released only 8-9 days back and it appears that article is solely created for promotional purposes (the original creator username gives obvious hint of COI).-- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:54, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * =NSOFT is an essay but  it's fairly  accurate -  perhaps it should be promoted to  Guideline', you  may  wish  to  read it again  to  see if you  have't  missed anything. We  can't  CSD the article because no  CSD criteria covers products. I  don't  quite see how there is a COI, perhaps you  can  explain  that  for me. The article is not  overly  promotional (even if that  is what  the author is trying  to  do), but  fails sources that  demonstrate notability  per WP:GNG. I  would suggest  looking  for sources, and if you  don't  find any, PROD it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Username is Hswikiac => HS+Wiki+AC => Hi slider+ Wiki + account. So it appears that this account is made only to write about the software i.e. to promote it. Yes, the tone is not promotional, that why I didn't tag it for that. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 11:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletion Reversal Request
Hi Kudpung, I am kindly requesting the reversal of your decision to delete the Kyle McMahon page (& 2 associated re-directs). To give you some background, myself and a few other fans had come together and gone to the Wikipedia Live Help chatroom and spoke with editors in there to make sure he met the requirements for Wikipedia. They all agreed he did. From there, we split our work up amongst ourselves and did a ton of research. Then everyone did their section and sent it to me, who then used my sandbox to test. I had the Wikipedia Live Help chat editors review and made their suggested changes before publishing. Once they approved, we published it and then the page was approved for publishing. Then, someone from Delaware, Kyle (& myself) homestate, tagged it for deletion. We don't know if this was personal, or what, but it was very frustrating as we came to the live editors first to even see if we should do all that work first. Then, it was put up for debate, so I told the other people that worked on it to come give their opinions too. Then someone said there was an influx of "new" / single purpose accounts, and I told them that was because of me telling the other contributors to join ( I didn't know that was frowned upon : But I also didn't want anyone to think I was trying to cheat the system. In any event, we worked very hard. The bottom line for us, is that we believe someone with a major record label deal, with a worldwide release, who's worked with people like Madonna,did the US Open thing, has been on Oprah 4 times recently, a spokesperson for the Paternity Court TV show, and is a national public speaker on fatherless sons, is notable enough to be included in the wiki. I know you're doing your best to make sure there aren't spammers and solicitors and marketing people. We are not those people. We are just a group of people who support this remarkable kid in his career, and with multiple references in other people's wiki's, figured he deserved one of his own. Thanks for your time & sorry for the long winded-ness (typed-ness? lol)FeerTheDeer (talk) 06:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Edited to add: We also neglected to see that there is an IMDB page on him, which none of us seemed to have caught when writing our sections. Obviously we would add that to the page as well, as it wasn't on there anywhere before. He's also since the wikipedia page was created, signed on with Paternity Court (a national tv show debuting in the fall) as a spokesperson. FeerTheDeer (talk) 06:58, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. The decision was not  mine. I  only  assessed the community  consensus at Articles for deletion/Kyle McMahon and carried out the required action which  needs access to  administrators' deletion  tools, so  I can't unilaterally  undo  something  that  was decided by  those who  voted. The standard course of action  now is to  repost  your  case at  Deletion review. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Kudpung - Thanks for responding so quickly! The consensus according to the vote page was 8 to 8. What is the deciding vote? Also, on that page step 1 says "discuss the matter with the closing administrator and try to resolve it with him or her first." FeerTheDeer (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC) FeerTheDeer (talk) 20:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * When evaluating consensus we do  not  take a straight  count  of the votes. We  take into  account  the strength of the arguments and may  well even discount  votes that  have been made by  single purpose accounts that  may  have been created for the sole purpose of supporting  the arguments and/or influencing  the outcome. You  have done right  in contacting  me first, and hence my  advice was to repost your case to  Deletion review. The community  will  then decide whether or not my  evaluation of the consensus was appropriate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Gotcha, thanks so much Kudpung for all of your help! Will reach out to them next! FeerTheDeer (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Leroy
Hi, you deleted my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leroy_(software)

This is a legitimate piece of software and everything I put on the page was factual. I wanted to include this in wikipedia along with all the other release automation software that is also there. What was wrong with what I posted ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snuggletron (talk • contribs) 20:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Snuggletron. Please see the criterion  under which  this was deleted at User talk:Leroydeploy (your former talk page). You  may  also  wish  to  read the notability  guideline for software at WP:NSOFT and the General  Notability  Guidelines. If  you  feel  the article can meet those requirements, I  can restore the article to  your user sub  page where you  will  be able to  improve it  and submit  it for review before it is published. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Kallsoft
Hi Kudpung,

I was in a process of creating page for Kallsoft, an emerging software firm in India. I felt it would be informative for people to add wiki page. I had also listed their product under List of ERP packages. I don't know why my work was deleted. I'm new to wiki contributor list, but very old user and donor. Please help me to undelete the page.

Regards, Arun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunkallaje (talk • contribs) 20:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Arun. Please see the criterion under which  this was deleted. You  may  also  wish  to  read the notability  guideline for software at WP:NSOFT and the General  Notability  Guidelines. If  you  feel  the article can meet those requirements, I  can restore the article to  your user sub  page where you  will  be able to  improve it  and submit  it for review before it is published. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Nite Tours page
I ask you to reconsider deleting the page I posted concerning Nite Tours. It is an industry created to show people the nightlife in major cities and allow them to participate in the various activities available. Darin Feth, when he created Nite Tours, created the night tour business as it is known today. It is in the same vein as Microsoft in the computing industry and McDonalds in the fast food industry, which you allow pages. By using the Nite Tours name, we are representing an industry and a lifestyle as opposed to a company. I don't understand why some companies which are inventive in an industry can have pages and yet you deny me. I ask you again to reconsider my request. AllaninAlb (talk) 20:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC).


 * Hi. There are several issues here. Firstly, as it  stands the article is indeed promotional because it  represents a company without  presenting  any  sources that  support the claimed facts. It  may  be possible that  the company  is notable but  that  needs to  documented by  reliable, independent sources, and any  awards must  also  be proven with  references to  the list  on  the awarders' websites. Please also  see WP:OTHERSTUFF for more background regarding vast  organisations such  as Microsft  and MacDonald's. If  you  feel  that  the article can meet our criteria for companies at WP:ORG and the General  Notability  Guidelines, I  can restore the article to  your user sub  page where you  will  be able to  improve it  and submit  it for review before it is published.~ Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Request to undelete the page Kallsoft and the item in List of ERP Packages.
Dear Kudpung,

I went through sections and procedures of Wikipedia.

Your view: A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject.

My view: Article about a company, corporation or organization is useful if that organization really provides the services as described in the page. I feel that a company has the right to share the information of what it offers, it is an information after all. If it were advertising, it would go ahead with an ad agency, not wiki. I believe wikipedia is an information source, it would be biased if a worthy information is missing in Wikipedia. Might not be worthy for millions, but for people who are relevant to that subject.

Right view: You are the better person to judge as I was only an information seeker with wikipedia from 2005 until today. But you are experienced and close associate at Wikipedia from 2005. I respect your decision, but request you to review.

Thank you Regards, Arun


 * Arun, Please see my comment  at  your earlier message above. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Anitha Shaiq
Thanks, that's what I thought, but given my involvement with this article, I thought it best to get a second opinion  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:23, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Seen this kind of thing many times at  OTRS. Probably be rejected. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:41, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism on User page
How can I stop a user from continuously vandalizing my user page. I did a user report on Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism however I want the user to stop immediately. Any help will be great. ///Euro Car GT 15:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ An admin fixed the situation. User reported and blocked. ///Euro Car GT  15:37, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Deleted article
Hi! Kindly email me a copy of the article Leroy (software) which you deleted. My email is sammmacharia at gmail dot com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.24.111.246 (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If I  receive a request  from  the creator I  will  see what  I  can do. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

A bit of help
Dear Kudpung, you told me the following "if you intend to  engage in  an activity  that may  increase traffic to  your  talk  page, please see WP:NLS (even ToolServer can't  parse it)." – Thanks for the advice. Still I am unsure what you imply. I was not aware that my user name might be a problem for other users to reach my talk page. Would it be a solution to use a signature as described in WP:NLS? Thank you very much and kind regards, 㓟 (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, yes, that's why I  provided the link. The problem is that  anyone who  can't  read Chinese has no  way  of pronouncing  it, and most  of us don't  have Chinese characters on  our keyboard even if we have a character insertion  pallet tool (not  available on  mobile devices BTW). I think simply  a Latin  alphabet  transcription  may  be aproriate, for the rest, users could probably  copy  and pase you  sig if they  want  to  refer to  you or search  for you.  Something  like: User:㓟 - (transcription here). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help! Kind regards, User:㓟 - (pi) (talk) 01:53, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I picked the wrong CSD
The information is already listed on another page. In fact the North Korea article I did edit to keep. The Vietnam and United Nations article contains nothing but a blank template looking page, with one line containing the date they joined. All of which is already on the United Nations member states page. Also while I've had some issues with AfD in the past, for the most part my views are being held up in regards to consensus. The CSD definitions though I'm still having a tough time fully understanding since what the title calls the CSD and the actual criteria can be sometimes be a bit different. I was encouraged to try and use CSD more often then AfD for those cases where it could apply, thus preventing an AfD for something that could be CSDd. I will say I've decided to stop patrolling anything having to do with sports. There seems to be more exceptions, to the exception, to the exception to the GNG then any other topic. I was talking with another experienced Wiki editor at a local city gathering. We both discussed how it seems there needs to be some type of central guide for all the exceptions to GNG. Right now you end up having to search through multiple essays/wiki policies to find out if there's an exception. This is where I get hit normally on an AfD - the article is non-notable, but somewhere, someplace there's an exception to the GNG allowing said article. In terms of contributing I wouldn't mind working on such a list, but I'd need help finding all the essays/exceptions to put together such a list. Also it seems a number of my first time errors are coming to light again recently because of relistings of relistings, not because of new/repeat issues of the same nature. As always I welcome further guidance regardless of if it's positive or negative. Caffeyw (talk) 06:43, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

PS Once I posted it under the correct CSD an admin deleted the article. Caffeyw (talk) 06:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I really  do  not  want  to discourage you, but  deletions is an area where we try  hard to  avoid hit-and-miss errors because it  can impact  on  editor retention  for one thing. I  realise you  are erring  on  the side of caution  by  nominating  articles for deletion  at  CSd and/or AfD the way  you  do, but  certainly  participating  as a !voter at  AfD and following  the discussions and the outcome will  reward itself with  a better overview of notability  etc - most  articles sent  to  AfD are due to  a lack  of meeting  notability  criteria. I  don't  think  there is actually  a list  of exceptions, but  generally, topics such  as human settlements and schools (see: WP:OUTCOMES) enjoy exceptions and if I  ca remember any  more I'll  let  you  know. As you'll  see from  my  user page, I  have a rather clear mind  on  BLPs, but  as an admin  I  have to  go  with what  is practiced. Some BLPs may  require some research  before tagging; it's usually  best  to  tag the unreferenced one  s that  sound reasonable with  WP:BLPPROD  (I  helped develop that  policy), then keep  an eye on  what  happens to  it. Over the years, our CSD criteria have been carefully  crafted to  be as clear and unambiguous as possible.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

New Haven mayoral election
Dear Kudpung, There are four different candidates in the upcoming New Haven mayoral election, and only one of them, Toni Harp, had her own page. I felt that all four of them deserved coverage on Wikipedia, although it is true that the stubs do not really qualify as full-fledged articles. I will let you be the judge. The pages I added are Kermit Carolina, Justin Elicker, and Henry Fernandez (politician). --PlantPerson (talk) 14:20, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Plantperson. I fully  understand what  you  wanted to  do but  unfortunately  those articles at  Kermit Carolina, Justin Elicker, and Henry Fernandez (politician) will  have to  go because they  do  not  meet  WP:POLITICIAN. Toni Harp got  a page because she was already  an elected senator. If  you  like, if you  ask  me here, I  can delete those other three for you  to  save them  going  through  a public deletion  process, and it  would good for you  for demonstrating  an understanding of our policies. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Khan jabir
Noting the lengthy deletion log of this page, what is the best approach for dealing with this: User:Khanjabir3? It appears to be a duplicate of the most recent version of that page. -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  14:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've just deleted that  too. I've salted all  the other articles and if he starts creating  them  again under more different  titles to evade the salt  I'll  block  him. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Then you'll want to see the file usage list at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Khanjabir.jpg. -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  14:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not  surprised, but  I'm  afraid I don't  work  at  Commons. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've tracked down all  his other Wikipedia accounts and blocked them  all. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't mean for that reason. I meant there is a list of other pages here in unusual places that are virtually the same. -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  15:04, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just  figured that  out and I'm going  though  and deleting  them  too  and blocking even more of his accounts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)