User talk:MIDI/2009

Chrisopher Ryan Reynolds
Hi. Just a note to say that its better to tag articles like this as an attack page rather than vandalism. If it was tagged as an attack page, it would have been treated with more urgency. Thanks. Epbr123 (talk) 18:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
I appreciate that!--Accdude92 (Happy January!) 18:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs! Cycle~ (talk) 18:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
It looks like it has been a good week for you in this. Thanks for fixing those links. I'm glad I didn't edit over your edits as I was working on them at the same time as you. At least someone here knows how to get those links to work. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs. Presumably the ships will have names (rather than just a hull number) at some point – at which time they can be changed.  One thing though – is there are reason that Virginia class is italicised as Virginia-class?  I've changed it in a few of the articles, but realised it's like that in them all – I'd rather clarify before carrying on!  Cycle~ (talk) 02:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Redirect
Hi can you explain the redirect on the page on hosted cms. It was still under construction. Any particular reason, I can modify my article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belmond (talk • contribs) 05:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course. The Hosted cms article (viewable here) seemed to be about CMSs, not specifically hosted ones.  I'm not entirely sure that a "hosted" CMS is worthy (in its own right) of an article; it is merely one way of running such a system (it isn't even mentioned in the parent article).  You are, of course, welcome to prove me wrong :-).  If – as you say – the article wasn't finished, I suggest you finish it off at User:Belmond/Hosted CMS (where, as it would be in you user namespace, wouldn't be deleted) and then let me know.  We can always get a third opinion on it.  Cheers!  Cycle~ (talk) 08:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleting my article
Please, Nicholas west (paradox) is not a personal attack, it is a genuine belief supported my Nickology. I do not know why it has, twice, been deleted as a personal attack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gozzy345 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Attacks don't have to be violent – ANY defamatory content may qualify and be classed as libel. We take that very seriously, and as such any articles that violate the neutral point of view policy will be deleted.  Additionally, unverified claims may well be deleted.  If such a paradox does exist – along with the Nickology – then multiple (independent) reliable sources will be required to verify the infomation.  Cycle~ (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I shall attempt to get other people to verify, then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gozzy345 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Verification is shown through multiple independent reliable sources, and not necessarily through personal testimony. Cycle~ (talk) 15:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

What Happens if there is no published evidence, or websites etc., but it is a real thing. I can get other theorists to confirm, but we have not published any results yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gozzy345 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Unverified information (especially that which may have disputed neutrality) will be deleted.  Until something is covered in multiple independent reliable sources, it is not necessarily considered notable and could also be deleted under that guideline.  Cheers Cycle~ (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania Oxford bid
Some time ago you indicated your support of the Oxford 2010 Wikimania Bid, and it was recieved with much gratitude. I now ask if you could could help support our bid by contributing to the bid page that is located at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2010/Bids/Oxford. Now is the critical period for work to continue on the bid as the official bidding period has now started and the jury has been formed.

I do not ask for huge swathes of time, just enough that with eveyrone working on this, it can be completed in time to the high standard required in a bid. For the bid page, an excellent source of information is the travel wiki article on the City of Oxford which is found at: http://wikitravel.org/en/Oxford. The chance of bringing Wikimania to the UK is the best so far and i expect the best chance for many years. With a fresh and stong UK chapter we have an amazing opportunity to put ourselves on the map. If you have any questions, please mail them to the Wikimedia UK mailing list, email me or post a message on my talk page and i will answer as quickly as possible.

I look forward to working with you on the bid page. Many Thanks. Sedd&sigma;n talk 15:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hatfield Heath
Hi there. I noticed you changed the location of Hatfield Heath on the Jade Goody article. When I wrote it in, I was going on this as an indicator, since this is the actual place of the wedding. My own mother questioned it, which is why I checked it out. I'm not sure which is correct personally, but it does seem there is some dispute. Would you rather keep it as Essex or state that it is on the border? Since Down Hall appears to consider itself in Hertfordshire, this makes me lean towards Hertfordshire. Sky83 (talk) 12:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. It's unquestionably in Essex – our article states so (with a reference) and the Hatfield Heath ward (according to the Office of National Statistics) does not cross the border into Hertfordshire  (the border being west of the M11 motorway).  However, the source for Down Hall states that it's in Hertfordshire, and I guess that's what we should go by until we can verify that it's in Essex.  Cycle~ (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Is this sufficient? Cycle~ (talk) 12:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What you have said is exactly the reason I wrote Hertfordshire. What would be more correct would be to either say 'Down Hall, Hatfield Heath', or 'Down Hall, Hertfordshire'. Of course, with it being on the border, it's entirely possible (and even probable given the sources) that while Hatfield Heath seems to be considered more in Essex by some sources, that Down Hall is in the 'across the border' part and actually lies in Hertfordshire. Sky83 (talk) 12:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Further comment: I wrote that above while you were editing as well, but I'll leave the comment anyway. Personally, yes, I feel that your source is good, but there are multiple articles also saying Hertfordshire. I think it might be better to change it to 'Down Hall, Hatfield Heath', just to avoid any confusion at the moment. What do you think? Sky83 (talk) 12:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think change it to "Down Hall, Hatfield Heath" – with the link to give specifics about where it is. It's the other article's obligation to prove where Hatfield Heath is, but the JG article's responsibility to prove that the wedding will take place at Down Hall.  Cycle~ (talk) 12:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I totally agree, consider it done :). Sky83 (talk) 12:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Informationmanagement
Thanks for engaging this guy and transferring the material to his userspace. Good work, I hope we get more Wikipedians out of his project. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, I realised I could have come across as a bit of a dick without speaking to the editor after prodding the article. I'll keep an eye on them and see if they need more help with whatever they're looking into doing.  Cheers.  Cycle~ (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Automatic patrolling of tagged pages at New Page patrol
Hi there. There is a suggestion to get a bot to patrol any New Page that an editor has tagged for CSD, AfD, etc. As someone who patrols a lot, your opinion is particularly welcomed. -- Ged UK  10:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:SweetJesus.png)
Thanks for uploading File:SweetJesus.png. 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Zwilling.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Zwilling.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Phonefreak Honey
A tag has been placed on Phonefreak Honey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 21:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nigel Thomas and Jonathan Brentman
Hello, Thanks for your comment. I believe that the band member Nigel Thomas is notable enough outside the band, and have added a lot of information to the page. I also believe that Jonathan Brentman is also notable enough to outside the band.

This is because they have been the topic of conversation - half an hour on at least one interview - and in one example interview, only Nigel Thomas was present. The discussion was based around his background, childhood, education, and musical life. The same can be said for Jothan Brentman. Nigel Thomas has also written many songs independent of the band, and these had been featured on the radio also.

Thus, because of these points I beleive that at least Nigel Thomas is notable enough to have an article. Thanks for your time. Blaze42 (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The fact is, the interviews were undertaken because of the guys' position in the band. They would not have happened if the band didn't exist.  Can you provide a source for having solo material played on the radio?  A single play may count as trivial information, but inclusion on a (major) radio network's playlist (not just one or two plays) probably wouldn't pass WP:MUSIC #11.  Cheers for the reply.  Cycle~ (talk) 12:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I have found the following sources for solo material being played on the radio, but there's definitely more. I will find some more, and add it as soon as I have it.

Source 1: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=465479249

Source 2: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=419470831

Source 3: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=348356844

Source 4: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=347700646

Source 5: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=345940351

Source 6: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=343937567

Source 7: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=288287823

Source 8: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=167530716

Thanks. Blaze42 (talk) 13:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

More Sources:

Source 9: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=63159229&blogId=434531090

There have been thousands of other normal radio plays, including the BBC. Thanks. Blaze42 (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, MySpace blogs are not reliable sources (as per WP:YFA #4). I can't see where any of the blogs show that Thomas is notable outside of the band.  He may have made radio appearances doing (from what I can tell) acoustic versions of Foxes songs – but this is not independent of the band.  For Thomas to have his own article, he must pass WP:MUSIC – would he be notable if The Foxes didn't exist?  Cycle~ (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Nigel Thomas would be notable if The Foxes didn't exist because they are not acoustic versions of Foxes songs. If you click on the link inn the blog, you will see that it takes you to the BBC websites, and as such are reliable sources. Blaze42 (talk) 18:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * You've missed the point. If The Foxes didn't exist, he wouldn't be being interviewed.  He's not played the songs because of who his, only his notability within the band.  Could you provide direct sources for the coverage?  I tried the first few MySpace blogs and couldn't see anything (the one link to BBC Radio Berks just goes to the BBC Berkshire page).  Cheers.  Cycle~ (talk) 20:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Blaze42
Yes, I'm also having problems getting them to understand why it is inappropriate, and if this continues to be a problem I will request further input, as they, whilst now constantly citing guidelines as a reason, still appear to be completely disregarding what the policies they cite actually say. That image needs to be re-removed, and I, like you, do not wish to break 3RR. I will re-remove it later, and if it is readded I will request wider input. Thanks, &mdash; neuro (talk) 16:09, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

God as the Devil
Hello Cycle, I hope this is the right way to contact you. I have started a talk page on the article to ask about the tags you placed in it. I look forward to hearing back from you and others on what I need to do to fix any problem. Thanks for your help.


 * -- WagePeace (talk) 20:39, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Tully (band)
Hi Cycle~. Just wanted to let you know that I declined the speedy you suggested for this article, as I thought that it provided a reasonable assertion of importance. Best wishes, Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 05:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No problems. I'm not entirely sure I agree – I don't know whether a sentence of weasel words counts as a reasonable assertion of notability, but I'm glad the reference corroborates the group's work in (what seems to be) music for film/TV.  I don't mind that the speedy was declined – I'll even try work on the article myself.  Cheers!  Cycle~ (talk) 11:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Removing tags
Hi Cycle,

The God as the Devil article has undergone a good deal of work since it was posted and you tagged it. The major part of that has been a rewrite of the section of Biblical citations. The new version of that section is still in the form of a proposal referenced in the Quotations section of the talk page. There has been one vote so far in favor of the proposal and I intend to wait a couple of more days and then post the revised section if there are no objections. There have also been other fixes made, primarily in the form of improved referencing in the Opposition section.

If the proposal has no objections and I post the revised section of citations, then I'd like to remove your essay-like and weasel tags at that time. I know I am free to do that and could just wait to see what happens after doing so, but I thought I would check with you if you see any reasons for those tags to remain before I take them off.

If I were more experienced, I probably wouldn't bother you with this, but I'm still new, so I want to see how I'm doing before I proceed.

Thanks. -- WagePeace (talk) 02:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No problems! I think the article looks really good now – however the first sentence still gets me: "Several religious authors...".  I know this is proven and referenced in the article, but I think it gives a weasely impression to those who may not read much further.  The main body of the article is brilliant – my only reservations are with the introduction paragraphs.  I've removed the essay-like tag, but kept the WP:AWW one on for now.


 * I know you've worked hard on this one (just by looking at the page's history) and really admire your attitude. I noticed that your userpage says "I might contribute actual content later if I feel qualified".  I know that writing that was your first edit and that (as you said above) you still consider yourself new – but don't ever let anything like that hold you back from editing, we (and I mean we) wouldn't have the website we do if that was the case.  Be bold!  All of your edits are constructive – we're a better place for having editors like you!  Cycle~ (talk) 03:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive comments. I certainly did not pick a bland topic for my first new article, did I?

So on your tags, one down, one to go!

I've struggled with how to address your concern and what I came up with was to add, "as cited below," after "Several religious authors throughout history." Since every other sentence in the lead section refers to those authors or their writings, that puts the reader on notice that everything in this section is covered by information given in the body of the article.

Does that work, and are there other measly weasels that I haven't seen scurrying in dark corners of the article?

This is an amazing experience. After first being pissed off by some edits or tags, I keep finding that I like the article better for the changes they force. I even like my new version of the citations section better than the original, which surprised me a lot.

Anyway, let me know if I get my exterminator's license. -- WagePeace (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Since I haven't heard back on this after a couple of days, I've gone ahead and removed the "weasel" tag. Let me know if you still see any problems. -- WagePeace (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Eddie Love
The picture was sent to the band from the photographer and linked on their facebook page as a fan picture. Please leave the page alone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goprazorback (talk • contribs) 03:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see our page on Donating copyrighted materials, it outlines the process required for these issues. Cheers. And please remember that this is a wiki; a collaborative project.  Cycle~ (talk) 03:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I am acting on behalf of the band with full permission to use the material from agoodfight.net, I am sitting in the bassist's bedroom making the edits! There is NO COPYRIGHT VIOLATION!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goprazorback (talk • contribs) 03:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Same thing as Eddie Love! I HAVE FULL PERMISSION TO USE MATERIAL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goprazorback (talk • contribs) 03:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, the only way to verify this would be to have a statement on the website releasing the (textual and image) content with a relevant license. A good example would be, ""The text of this website (or page, if you are specifically releasing one section) is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later and under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribute Share-Alike."  see WP:Donating copyrighted materials.  Cycle~ (talk) 03:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I am working for the band! I am not sure what that means to you, but the authors of the material are telling me to use it. THERE IS NO VIOLATION. I HAVE FULL PERMISSION! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goprazorback (talk • contribs) 04:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Typing in upper case is equivalent to shouting, please do not do it. I suggest you read the pages I outlined above; they show how we deal with copywritten material (whether or not you have permission, somebody wrote the biography).  The best way to allow use on Wikipedia is to release the information by GFDL, which can be done by placing the above statement on the web page.  Cycle~ (talk) 04:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Overwriting your warning
I had already permanently blocked that vandal just now - so have added to your warning. Apologies for doubling up. Ian Cairns (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No problems! Thanks for letting me know.  Cycle~ (talk) 19:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania 2010 Oxford bid
Thank you for supporting the Oxford bid to hold Wikimania 2010! We're currently in the final stages of the bid process - the jury will be announcing their decision by the 16th April. We're currently putting together the local team for the bid (who will do what if the bid wins); if you're able to be on the local team, please put your name in the appropriate place on m:Wikimania 2010/Bids/Oxford/Team. We'd also welcome anything you can do to help refine the bid in these last few days. If you have any questions, please let me or User:Seddon know. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Scouting for Girls
I;m sorry, I didn't mean it really!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.42.105 (talk) 22:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied on user's talk page. Cycle~ (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Great hall rap question
I don't mind you declining my speedy A7 tag, but I don't see how an article that you yourself describe as "a student project without notability" fails the A7 criteria. I feel like I'm missing something here. Would you mind to explain your views? Yinta ɳ  22:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * A7 doesn't apply to films – WP:FILMNOT states that "failing to satisfy [the film notability guidelines] is not a criterion for speedy deletion". Of course this film doesn't even satisfy the general notability guidelines, but that isn't grounds for speedy either.  Cycle~ (talk) 22:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yinta ɳ   22:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Inbetweeners
Hey man. Thanks for the welcome. Just going to reply to your points, if you don't mind.
 * This is actually some really helpful advice, seeing as I've always thought that if you didn't put the  tag, then all of the text was together, if you know what I mean. So thanks for that.
 * Yeah, I only realised this earlier when I read a policy page on importance and stuff. Still, thanks for letting me know.

So yeah, thanks for the advice and the welcome. Oh, and thanks for making my talk page no longer a red link, haha. :-) Wisi jane  23:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No probs! You might like to look at WP:NOWRAP and WP:NEWLINE (I've only just come across them myself); they talk about line breaks far better than I could explain in a few minutes!  Cycle~ (talk) 00:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Icons help
Cycle~,

I came across your page as I'm watching the Inbetweeners page. I'm trying to steal the Icons bar you have at the top of your talk and user pages as it's far and way the most elegant yet effective solution I've seen. However, I'm a bit stuck and am asking for your help please. I've successfully altered the links and the icon at User:Bigger digger/Icons, but can't make it appear anywhere else, I just get a red link to a template, see User:Bigger digger/Sandbox.

I'd be massively grateful for any help you can offer at fixing it, I can only guess it's something to do with the whitespace or underscore in my name. I'm still just finding my way around this place so it could probably be anything!

Finally, I see you created West Berkshire Brewery, is the beer any good?! Bigger digger (talk) 00:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi! It's quite straightforward really –  you missed the user namespace from the template link in your sandbox – yours should be   (rather than just  ).  That's kind of the reason I added the   line to my template – it doesn't affect the template, just shows up so I can easily copy and paste the template link.  Placing something between   tags means it'll show up on the template page, but not be transcluded when you add the template to another page.
 * I hope that helps – it's a bit of a ramble, but basically you need  to add it – the red link is purely because it can't be found (as the Bigger digger/Icons template doesn't exist).  And as for West Berkshire Brewery – it's good stuff!  I've never seen it outside of West Berkshire though, so it doesn't get around!  Cheers. Cycle~ (talk) 11:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course! Thank you! I knew it would be something simple or obvious that I'd overlooked... I'm am in your debt. I'll have to veer off the M4 at some point to check out some Old Father Thames. Bigger digger (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

2009 FA Cup Final
shove it up your arse. Thank you. 129.11.76.229 (talk) 14:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good one. Cycle~ (talk) 14:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * block away. non-static IP :) 129.11.76.229 (talk) 14:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin; I don't have the ability to block. Cycle~ (talk) 14:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * well, why bother then. bit of a waste of time this whole episode isnt it? lol, what a berk! 129.11.76.229 (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone else can do it. It's not a waste of time; your edit summary was inappropriate and insulting to another contributor, and there was no need to reply to me in the childish manner that you did.  Cycle~ (talk) 14:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Football Associations templates
What template do you think is best for county football associations? I like what you have done here with the Infobox Organization template. I've been using National football association as per this example, but i think it looks a bit sparse. Considering the amount of county FA's articles i'm tempted to create a new template just for them. What do you think should be in it? A bit of the one you've been using and a bit of the one i have? Thanks Uksam88 (talk) 19:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'd not given it much thought – I only added the organisation infobox as it seemed the most generic, and a few of the similar pages I looked at (such as Birmingham County Football Association and Devon County Football Association) had no infobox. I think a hybrid would be useful – there's loads of attributes in "my" one which aren't necessary, but "your" one seems a bit restrictive.  Perhaps just an augmented version of yours?  Cycle~ (talk) 20:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Diversity
Do you want to take it to DYK? It is eligible. Sceptre (talk) 00:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Converted to PROD: Felisha Terrell
Hello Fribbulus Xax, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have changed a page you tagged (Felisha Terrell) from being tagged for speedy deletion to being tagged for proposed deletion. The speedy deletion criteria are very narrow, and do not fit the page in question. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any queries, please let me know. Thanks again! decltype (talk) 09:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs – I'll keep an eye on it. Cheers.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 09:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Great. I saw your comment on the talk page, and I agree with your assessment, it's not enough for WP:ENTERTAINER, but WP:CSD requires less, thus PROD. Regards, decltype (talk) 09:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Glastonbury 2009 wristband
So, you managed to remove your wristband without breaking it, did you? --Rebroad (talk) 17:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Not quite... I stuck a metal skewer into it and wiggled until it loosened and I could slide it off – they'd put it on quite tight this year. Usually I keep the wristband on for a while – I find it's a good conversation starter with strangers who've also been.  I do have a tan line from where it was, though!  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Edits on Gooroo Software entry
Hi, and thanks for your notes and edits on this entry. I am Gooroo's UK PR contact, but I felt I was careful not to include any unsubstantiated claims or hyperbole for the company and solutions. I also linked only to credible IT media sources. Just wanted to explain where I was coming from. Craig.Coward (talk) 11:00 GMT, 9 July 09  —Preceding undated comment added 09:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC).

Re: CSD noms
I probably went a little whole hog, but the articles were tagged as such because of the inappropriate nonsense Hoklo9999 was adding to them, such as "The Phrase 'Fuck Off And Die' Is Sexual Harasment Like Saying 'Go Fuck Your Penis.' " He continued posting material like that despite warnings from myself and another user to stop, which constitutes vandalism. sixty nine  • spill it •  00:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, but can't help feel that this user has been somewhat bitten. Perhaps that's me assuming too much good faith, but it seems on the whole they've tried to create articles on legitimate Green Day songs – without realising our original research policy and guidelines on profanity.  In terms of the articles, I've redirected or rewritten (wikified/stubbed) them where appropriate.
 * I must note that the warning given by Coffee was for a slightly different article (although named similarly, it contained no suitable content – clearly speedy deletable). I think it would be best to show the user what's wrong with the articles rather than going straight in with a block – after all, they've been registered less than a day and are unlikely to know how the whole thing works.  Thanks for your input.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 00:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, they're undeniably vandalising now, ClueBot got it. There goes my friendly introduction... :)  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 00:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Efestivals screen.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Efestivals screen.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Diversity (dance troupe)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Diversity (dance troupe). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Diversity (dance troupe) (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you check ...
... the infoboxes for Hoe Benham, Wickham Heath, Wickham, Berkshire and Ownham that you created last year? I think the constituency is not right and the councils mentioned (metropolitan) seem out of place in this rural area. Best Wishes Saga City (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, I'll see what I can do. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Purugu
Hi. I noticed that you changed the PROD on this article to a dictionary redirect. No problem with that, except the redirect misses one bit of the original, namely that it's in Telugu. Favonian (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, looks like that was some sort of edit conflict. Is there a template that would suit this better, or would you be happier with the delete?  I'm cool either way – I'd only made it as a soft redirect after a quick search for the term at Wiktionary.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 21:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Linking to Wiktionary is probably the best solution, but I've changed the key from "insect" to "purugu". That way you can actually see that a) it can mean either insect or worm, and b) it's Telugu.  Favonian (talk) 10:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Coolio. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 10:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Double L
Why do you keep deleting my Musician Profile? I dont't understand what I'm doing wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndItsDoubleL (talk • contribs)
 * Probably because it fails WP:MUSICBIO miserably. Favonian (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC) The reason I nominated the article you created for deletion (I am not an administrator so don't have the ability to delete articles) is that it does not show why it passes our notability guidelines for musicians. Remember that we don't exist as a personal web site provider; we're not MySpace.  Check out the general notability guidelines for the absolute basics of what an article like this should be able to do.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 11:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Challenge to your deletion
You deleted my user page because it looked like another page.

That is because there are 56 Army National Guard CST's in the US that fall in each state's jurisdiction. The page you said that mine mirrored is probably because some of the verbiage is pulled directly from the CST charter from the National Guard Bureau. You referenced another state's CST page. When my page is published/launched, I want Maryland first responders to know who we are, what we do, and how to get ahold of us. The page you referenced is only good for that state. Please put my page back or inform me how to get my unit's information on there. Thank you Acollins17 (talk) 00:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)Drew
 * I blanked (rather than deleted) your user page as it was a copyright violation – this is irrespective of any other page I may or may not have tagged. As I said on your talk page, if you wish to use this content, there are steps to take to allow its use.  As it sounds like you have a link with the web site in question, you can follow the "donating copyrighted materials" route.  However, I suggest you read our guidelines on conflict of interest.  As I said in my original post, copied text (even with permission) is often biased – and so not suitable.  It seems you may misunderstand Wikipedia; we don't provide a service to allow groups to communicate with people (that's what web sites are for).  We aim to document organisations and groups that conform with our notability guidelines.  If the CST article is notable (and worthy of inclusion), the page would not serve as a way of finding out "who [we] are, what [we] do, and how to get ahold of [us]".
 * As a next step I feel it may be worthwhile to follow the steps at WP:AFC to submit a draft article for review before it is fully included on the site. If you have any more questions, I'd be more than happy to help.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 01:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you send me back my page so I have a copy of it? The idea of this page IS to inform people of what our organization is. The problem here is that there is a national charter. Each state has a team like mine that fall under the national charter. The website you said that I copied from is another state's team who pulled some of their verbiage from the national charter. Because it is a government document (Department of Defense), military units can copy it all day long. I don't see the issue here. If you are booting me off, you have to boot the other article off because they got their info from the same document! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acollins17 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Regarding Contact the 32nd CST, you will have to contact User:IronGargoyle, the administrator who deleted the page. Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Day Turns Night band page on Wikipedia
Hi there,

what contribution would be considered of significance? I feel this is very well presented and documents a respected individual or groups efforts to make themselves more 'present' on the cyber arena. I would like to call on point 7 of notability guide for musicians stating: Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

I will follow up on this motion with references form published media. -- Sarge d&#39; Night (talk) 12:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * If you can reference that the band pass this particular criterion then of course the article would stay. To pass it would have to comply with the general notability guideline, which basically states that it must have multiple coverage by reliable third-party sources.  If you have any trouble with the referencing of the article, I'd be more than happy to help – just let me know.  Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 12:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I would appreciate your assistance greatly. I will review the general notability guideline. Also go through the reliable third-party sources document. Thank you -- Sarge d&#39; Night (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This user has also requested my help. I've placed the deleted content into a sandbox page for him and you can find the associated conversation on my talk page if you care to follow it.  Thanks for providing the most useful and relevant advice above; feel free to call on me if I can be of further assistance.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. Ive read up a bit more on the suggested articles. When considering;
 * ''Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable.[note 1]
 * This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:'' - from Notability (music)
 * and within [note 2] in this article:
 * What constitutes a "published work" is deliberately broad
 * I would like to know:
 * one of the key references i would like to add is from a 3000+ subscribed online newsletter, sent out in email form. It's from the owner of largest online merchandise store in south africa (for our genre). Would this be considered reliable and significant, and how would I go about citing an email?
 * Thank you for your time -- Sarge d&#39; Night (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry for taking a while to reply – I've been somewhat busy in the real world and my Wikipedia time has been dominated by other goings-on. Anyway.  The issue with email content is that it is difficult to verify the authority and validity of the content (see WP:SOURCES) – in other words, if I wanted to verify the statement, I wouldn't have access to the email as I'm not subscribed.  Citing it would, however, be much less of a problem than establishing whether it constitutes a reliable source – I presume that a merchandise store will be less than neutral!  I guess the main question would be whether the newsletter is published online – if so, it makes matters a lot easier.  However, you should bear in mind the conflict of interest guideline when editing articles you're closely involved with (which, although not prohibitive, is highly discouraged).  You must question the reason the information is added to Wikipedia – is it to benefit the Wikipedia community or the band?  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 22:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Stylophone
I noticed you've made recent edits on the Stylophone entry. VBS.tv just debuted a short documentary on the instrument, interviewing both Brian Jarvis and Little Boots. The short can be seen here -- www.vbs.tv/watch/motherboard/the-stylophone

Is this something you feel would be a legitimate external link or reference for the Stylophone entry or possibly an addition to the Popular Culture section? Thanks! CorridorX (talk) 18:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at it; thanks for the heads-up. It's more likely that it can be used as a source – rather than a link – and trivia/pop culture sections are discouraged.  The last time I looked at the article, it looked as if the "usage" and "popular culture" weren't really that different, and that any info in the latter could be merged (if it was sufficiently sourced).  Anyway; thanks for letting me know about this source – I'll have a look and let you know my thoughts about what we could add!  Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Michael Kapoustin
You may want to take a look at Michael Kapoustin. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I noticed that. I didn't comment as it wasn't directed to me (well, it was directed at me, but you know what I mean).  The difficulty with this is that the editor/subject is evidently extremely passionate about this – and rightly so.  However, it seems difficult to explain that the current article is neutral, and only includes verifiable information.  I've tried explaining that we're not trying to suppress information (and that his personal account isn't necessarily doubted) but anything even slightly contentious must be sourced.  As it stands, I feel the article does need more content on the opposition to the conviction/sentence, but it seems like co-operation with the other editor is one of the only ways sources can be found (like was stated on your talk page, a Google search unearthed nothing really relevant).  Cheers for all the help with this.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 00:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

fyi
FYI - http://www.classroomhelp.com/lessons/Presidents/reagan.html - may not be a hoax (I originally thought so too). Certainly needs cleanup, and probably not notable or only a mention on the Ronald Reagan article.  7   talk &#124; &Delta; &#124;   01:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs, I just replied on the talk page there – I suggest a redirect to Ronald Reagan – true or not, there's no need for a seperate article. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 01:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Probably not even a need for a redir... as I don't believe the subject (the fish or boy giving the fish) is notable.  Just pointing out that it *may* not be a hoax.  Although the sources I found are far from RS.     7   talk &#124; &Delta; &#124;   01:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Runway Magazine Article
Can you tell me how to fix this article? FashionFoward —Preceding unsigned comment added by FashionFoward (talk • contribs) 01:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The main issue seems to be with the articles referencing. Generally speaking, statements are backed up in articles by reliable sources, often (but not always) websites.  These must be independent of the subject, and verifiable.  As an example in the Runway Magazine article, the "legal issues" section states that "In 2009 the Unites Awarded the trademark for Runway Magazine to Runway Beauty, Inc when serveral imposters poped up".  Ideally, this would be referenced with something like a news article (perhaps from a trade publication) where it is specifically stated.  Citations should link to specific articles or pages, rather than search results (as seems to be the case in the article).  WP:CITE covers pretty much all of this, and gives a fair idea how to go about doing this.  I hope this begins to answer your question – leave me a message if you need more help.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 22:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Hangon Template
Sorry, originally it said Speedy Delete. I know what capital letters comes across as shouting & that was my intended reasoning I used the capitals. 『 ɠu¹ɖяy 』 ¤ • ¢ 17:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it was originally speedy. The current prod template explains what to do in this situation if you're still unclear.  Please refrain from shouting – even if you feel you need to make a point – use talk pages instead. Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 17:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Almeria desert.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Almeria desert.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fribbulus Xax ( talk ) 14:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Heart's Home for deletion
Hello Fribbulus Xav,

I understand you search on google.co.uk did not lead to a satisafactory result for you.

However, if you try Points Coeur (french translation) or Heart's Home USA you will clearly find some notable sources. On top of that, this organization is recognized by the UN and has the consultative status which I think makes it also notable. I understand that I have to rewrite parts and multiple reliable sources and I am ready to give it a shot but I would appreciate if you could give me more time for this...

Thank you in advance for your comprehension

Kind Regards

Charles.Longy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles.longy (talk • contribs) 20:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Having just researched after your message (for "heart's home usa" as an example), the problem I find is that there is very little third party commentary on the organisation. For example, the first page of results seems to cover the organisation's website, some blog/forum-style posts and trivial coverage.  Ideally, a Wikipedia article will have multiple, third-party sources that cover the subject.  Are there any existing documents only that cover Heart's Home, such as newspaper articles or a independent review of some kind?  I'd suggest you check WP:RS, WP:V and WP:CITE – the guidelines on reliable sources, verification and citations respectively.  Secondly, you're welcome (well, encouraged) to voice your opinion on the article's nominated deletion at Articles for deletion/Heart's Home.  Just start a new line at the bottom, state whether or not you think the article should be kept or deleted (usually by simply stating "Keep" or "Delete") followed by your rationale.  If you've got any further questions, I'd be happy to help.  Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 20:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

My updates...
Hi FX,

I just spent over an hour editing the My Phone page to accurately reflect the product and features. You immediately deleted those changes. I do not understand why. I'm a product manager for this product and want to make sure it is accurately represented. If nothing else, will you please send me my changes so that I can modify as you instruct me to? Thanks.

P.S. I made several changes to the page, though now can't tell if you were just removing the copyright sign at the top...or if you blocked all my other changes, including feature tables, etc. When I hit save page, none of my changes showed up... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michacha1 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The only edit I made to the page can be seen here. I removed your addition of "Microsoft®", which goes against our manual of style for trademarks.  Having read your message at the help desk, it seems you may have experienced an edit conflict.  This happens when you're busy editing a page, and another editor edits at the same time – but they hit "save" before you do.  At that point, you're not editing the most recent revision, so the software automatically stops you from overwriting their contribution.  Looking at your user contributions, it doesn't look as if it has saved.  You may be able to hit "back" in your browser to get back to the page, but apart from that there's not really anything that can be done "this end".
 * I suggest you take a look at WP:COI, our guidelines on conflict of interest. As you have a business (and presumably financial) interest in this product, it is strongly recommended that you refrain from editing the article.  This isn't assuming that you'll deliberately rewrite the article in a promotional tone, but bias can be introduced accidentally – even through the addition or removal of a single word.
 * If you've got any more questions about editing Wikipedia, don't hesitate to ask – I'm here to help! Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I did try hitting back right after it happened, but it gave me an error message. All so strange b/c I could see a comparison list of all my changes show up after I hit "save page".  Bumma.  I'll take a look at the guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michacha1 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:Editor review
Hey, thanks for commenting on my review! I'm afraid that I didn't make a mistake using Twinkle. It's one of my major problems - I tend to jump to an only warning all the time, almost every single time. It's something I do need to work on. And you're not the first to talk to me about it... ehehehe... A little insignificant Talk to me! (I have candy!) 20:09, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Updating the My Phone logo
Hi there--We need to update the My Phone logo, as the one shown is no longer current. Is there a quick and easy way to do this? I was hoping I could just attach the logo or upload it, but I could not find an easy way to do so. Will you please advise? Or could I just send to you to post? Thanks.

Michacha1 (talk) 17:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * To replace an image (rather than upload a new one):
 * Go to the image (File:My Phone logo.png)
 * Scroll down to the "File history" section and click Upload a new version of this file
 * In the "source filename" field, choose the file you want to upload
 * In the "file changes" field, describe any changes you've made (such as updating to a newer logo, cropping the image - also state the source of the image as it's a fair use, copyrighted image)
 * However, you shouldn't need to worry about copyright or licensing tags – as the ones from the previous image will remain
 * Hopefully this explains it and will work fine – let me know if it doesn't or you need any more help. If the original image still displays when visiting the article, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=My_Phone&action=purge.  This will purge the server's cache of the page and should sort it out. Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Somer Thompson
Thanks for the pointer, I will look into it.

I am new to wikipedia as a writer, and clearly need to review policies closer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JRMcNelis (talk • contribs) 12:06, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem whatsoever. If you'd like any help or pointers for any part of editing Wikipedia, don't hesitate to let me know!  Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 13:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wernffrwd
Sorry about that. I really thought it was nonesense. Bye.--camr nag 20:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 20:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Matster9090
OOOH! I lol'd at that post, it sounded like you was angry. (Matster9090 (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)) 
 * Very funny! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Why thank you kind Sir (Matster9090 (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC))
 * what is your xbox gamertag??????? bossssssssssssss
 * ???(Matster9090 (talk) 15:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC))

Hey, Just got your message.
I understand your reasons for reverting my change to the page, however I am part of the student body, and have lived in Winmalee for my whole life. My change was not biased and was factual about the sporting culture of the school.

Cheers

Ienjoychocolate (talk) 12:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * It may have been factual, but remember that our threshold for inclusion is verfiability, not truth. Can you provide third party, reliable sources to verify the statements you've made about the school's sporting culture? Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 13:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Adminship
Currently, your userrights read "[user,autoreviewer,rollbacker]", so I guess I'm really beating the crat this time. ;) Jamie S93  20:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and there! Shiny new tools. :) Congrats, Jamie S93  20:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 *  — Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 20:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Impressive RfA, congrats! - Dank (push to talk) 20:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cheers guys, more buttons to learn! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 21:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome RFA, Gratz you deserve the mop! RP459 (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Congrats on your perfect RFA. Now go pwn some bloogs... :) Thingg <sup style="color:#33ff00;">&#8853; <sup style="color:#ff0033;">&#8855;  03:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Congrats on getting adminship! <span style="-moz-border-radius:1em;border:1px solid black;font-size:11px;background-color:green;color:white;padding:1px 4px 1px 5px">Btilm  19:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * good job! =) I'm sure the vandals will enjoy your username just as much as I do! A8  UDI  12:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Congrats. Please be good and read WP:NAM when you get stressed out! Bearian (talk) 13:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Most impressive! Well done! By the time I saw your RfA, it was so obviously going to pass I didn't bother !voting. If yuo need advice or support, feel free to message me :) Ged  UK  15:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I left you a note at my talk page with the promise of future assignments. All the best, Drmies (talk) 15:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I hope you do a good job! Good luck!--<font style="color:#4682b4">Coldplay Expért <font style="color:Crimson">Let's talk 17:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well done sir! Crafty (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Mazel Tov! <b style="background:blue; color:white; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">Valley</b>2 city ‽ 19:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on your RfA! I hope you like the new tools. <font style="color:#4682b4">Décémbér21st2012Fréak  &#124;  <font style="color:#50C878">Talk 03:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
<font color="Orange">December21st2012Freak  <font color="Brown">Happy Thanksgiving! 16:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Robin Hogarth
Any idea why the entry for Robin Hogarth has been deleted? Johnalexwood (talk) 16:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Found it now - sorry, it was showing as a red link in my Watchlist so I thought it had been deleted. Fixed the Watchlist now. Johnalexwood (talk) 16:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

My new article (Sawphobia)
I need some help with my article, its called Sawphobia. Its about a phobia on chainsaws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke155 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I got your message!
Hello! I am Looney Kid! Thank you for telling me about the reason you removed that image! Yes, I do understand, but the reason I used that image is because I can't import my own image since I am not an admidistrator yet. Okay? Thank you for reading, Fribbulus Xax! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Looney kid (talk • contribs) 20:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You don't have to be an administrator to add your own image. You can't link to images on other websites using HTML (such as  ) as our software prohibits it – but you can upload images to our servers.  If you visit Upload you should be able to follow steps to upload an image.  You must bear in mind that if you don't own the image and didn't make it, it probably isn't suitable.  If you're not sure, though, I'd be happy to help you decide whether an image is suitable for Wikipedia – just ask.  Thanks for the message.  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I tried, but it said the option is limited to Autocomfirmed users and Admidistrators. Why does it say that?--Looney kid (talk) 02:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Being an autoconfirmed user is a user "status" required to do certain tasks, such as upload files (like you want to do), move pages, and edit semi-protected pages.  To become autoconfirmed you just need to perform more than 10 edits and have been editing for more than 4 days.  Looking at your contributions, you've made 35 edits, but only been editing since December 4 – you've still got another 37 hours or so.  So hold tight, you should be able to upload your image early next week!  Fribbulus Xax (talk) 11:07, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thank you :)! And meet my brother, here! Do you wanna say anything about him?--Looney kid (talk) 19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've given him a plate of cookies – you're welcome to share! :) Fribbulus Xax (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have tagged most of his uploads as possibly non-free, but Im not familiar with image policy; could you look over them and decide what the proper license for a re-colored cartoon snapshot would be? I am assuming they're probably nonfree which would mean that he can't use them on his userpage. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 01:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, it's been a long time. I've been REALLY busy lately, and I want you to check out my new logo! Speaking of logos, I just LOVE your stickynote! I wonder how you made such good artwork!--Looney kid (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Hey, Fribbulus, you changed your username! I never knew you could do that! I never knew your name was Matt, either. Well, have you seen my knew logo? Tell me if it's better than my old one, okay? Good! --Looney kid (talk) 21:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

<font face="Century Gothic"> Ret.Prof (talk) 13:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Brittany Murphy
She's really dead
 * The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2779223/Actress-Brittany-Murphy-dead-aged-32.html
 * NY Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/12/20/2009-12-20_actress_brittany_murphy_dies_at_32_of_heart_attack_report.html

-- MisterWiki  talk   contribs  20:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * As has been stated on the article's discussion page, these reports both cite TMZ as the only source. TMZ is not a WP:RS, and – regardless of its accuracy – we cannot use it.  It won't be long until we know for sure one way or another, and (as we're not a news source) there's no rush to "announce" something.  matt (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)