User talk:Madman/Archive 2

User talk:MadmanBot
Hi. I posted some questions for you at User talk:MadmanBot. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 14:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Koothanallur
Who are you to block "Koothanallur" page?? Tell me the reason. Email to jamaldn@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamaldn (talk • contribs) 16:36, 2 February 2008


 * I reply to messages left on my talkpage on my talkpage. I'll leave you a Talkback, though, so you know to check here.


 * I protected Koothanallur from creation per the Wikipedia protection policy. It was repeatedly recreated in violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy.  If you are capable of creating an article that is not a copyright infringement, please create one as a subpage of your userpage and it will be moved into place.  &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

afd
You participated in the previous afd for Southeast Leatherfest it is up again, at  and  you may want to comment. Sorry; you should have been notified earlier. DGG (talk) 13:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

A pleasure, I'm sure
Pleased to make your acquaintance! I guess all my edits have come during your break; it sure is nice to see another helpful (and yet thus far unfamiliar) face at WP:BRFA and I hope to see you around. From one BAG member to another, you might like to check whether any of the goalposts have moved in your absence. :) Heh. Anyhow, happy editing! - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 21:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I have of course re-reviewed the bot policy, the BRFA procedure, etc., but if you'd care to advise me of any other goalposts that may have moved, please feel free to. :) Thanks for the welcome back! &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Deonbot
Thanks for fixing this up. As you can see in the 'source code' just above it, it says 'For existing bots only', so I figured I didn't have to answer the question, and therefore the answer was - not applicable. Thanks for clearing it up :) &mdash; Deontalk 11:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem! That comment's ambiguous. :) &mdash; madman bum and angel 16:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops
Thanks for catching that error. It was when I was using very clumsy Find/replace logic, now I am using a regex that matches the whole template. Can you approve for another 100 edits or so, and I will go for a more diverse sample? Thanks! –xenotalk 18:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

You're back!
Glad to see you're back and editing again. I trust everything has been okay?  bibliomaniac 1  5  22:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had ups and downs; I'm poking my head out of semi-retirement to see if there's any way I can do some good even given my extremely heavy workload. :) &mdash; madman bum and angel 17:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

FAMBUSH
Hello - I'm trying to invent a word, and I'm not sure why you think the page I created has no content. I just created the content...made up something new. Is wikipedia restricted to only categorizing things that exist? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbernier (talk • contribs) 04:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is. It's an encyclopedia, after all. When a mainstream news organization starts using your word, feel free to re-create the article. &mdash; madman bum and angel 04:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

What qualifies as mainstream...? Do a search on Twitter for Fambush, you'll see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbernier (talk • contribs) 04:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Twitter does not qualify as a reliable source. Please see Reliable sources. &mdash; madman bum and angel 04:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

So much for creativity. I have to wait for someone at a newspaper (quaint) to reference it before it's legit. That's odd, to say the least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbernier (talk • contribs) 04:38, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Think of Wikipedia as a larger version of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Your made-up word would be unencyclopedic in the Britannica, and it's unencyclopedic here. &mdash; madman bum and angel 04:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Until we meet again, then. I'm making t-shirts right now in my underground lair, and someone will pick up on it! Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbernier (talk • contribs) 04:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Adam Andrzejewski
I noticed that you deleted this page with the rationale that it did not assert importance (CSD A7). However, looking at the deleted revisions, it pretty clearly asserted importance. The article stated that the subject was a candidate for Governor of Illinois. I would urge you to reconsider the deletion and nominate it at AfD instead--if you don't feel it meets notability criteria for inclusion. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 16:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. You may not be from IL, but this person and his organization is a major player in IL politics.--Loudes13 (talk) 16:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't nominate the article for speedy deletion, and you can feel free to undelete the article. However, Wikipedia's notability policies for politicians state that "Just being an [...] unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article." The article linked to no reliable source; it linked to an article in a mainstream news organization that did not exist, to a government resource he apparently had some hand in, and to his own Web site, a self-published source. If the article is undeleted, please assert notability with reliable sources. &mdash; madman bum and angel 17:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I didn't say you nominated the article for speedy deletion, but you should still understand the criteria for speedy deletion if you are going to judge the nominations of other editors and make deletion decisions about them. If an article asserts importance in a reasonable way it does not meet the A7 criteria for speedy deletion. The reasons you give are quite valid reasons for regular deletion, but are not valid for speedy deletion. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 19:24, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I do understand them, but I'll be a little less deletionist next time. I didn't delete the article because of the lack of reliable sources; I deleted it because I agreed with the nominator that the assertion of notability was insufficient, combined with the lack of reliable sources. Cheers! &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Archiving Approved requests
Be sure to actually move them to the archive page instead of removing them. Q T C 04:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry. Forgot that was the only section that wasn't archived only by category. Thanks! &mdash; madman bum and angel 04:47, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bots/Requests for approval/MadmanBot 7
Hi there. Thanks for performing that task for me. Is there any chance you could re-programme the bot to do the same procedure on the articles in Category:UEFA Champions League seasons, Category:European Cup seasons, Category:UEFA Cup seasons, Category:UEFA Europa League seasons, Category:Inter-Cities Fairs Cup seasons, Category:UEFA Futsal Cup, Category:UEFA Intertoto Cup and Category:UEFA Women's Cup? – PeeJay 17:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at doing this tomorrow. &mdash; madman bum and angel 03:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, mate. I know you must have plenty of things of your own that you want to do, so I really appreciate this. – PeeJay 07:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help! Sara©SF (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Any news on this wee project? – PeeJay 10:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been very busy lately; I'll try to tackle it today. &mdash; madman bum and angel 14:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, mate. Whenever you're ready :) – PeeJay 21:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * PeeJay, please confirm the following actions. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman bum and angel 17:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Actions confirmed. Looks good :-) – PeeJay 20:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * a bit back. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman bum and angel 01:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Multo bene! Thanks very much. – PeeJay 11:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Pillar bot framework
Hi Madman. Thanks for your message. Sorry for the belated response -- I've been rather busy with some real life stuff. I'd be delighted to see your changes and indeed give you commit access (if I can figure out how!). If you'd like to send them to me as patches (smoddy@gmail.com), I'll have a look and sort out the commit access. Best wishes, [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 16:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Jason Steele (footballer)
Just to let you know that this article - which was protected due to being created repeatedly before the guy had actually played a senior game - does actually need creating now: he's now played two league games on loan at Northampton. Any chance of unprotecting it? Clicriffhard (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of General average/New version for deletion
The article General average/New version is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/General average/New version until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: AIV for 74.231.185.3
Hello madman,

I noticed that you closed the AIV for as "no vandalism since final warning". However, you should note that the user's contribs list is lengthy and appears to consist exclusively of vandalism. It eludes me how they have not been warned to level 4 a very long time ago. Thus, I still recommend applying schoolblock. Zzarch (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * However, there were only two instances of vandalism today and there had been none in about an hour, if I recall correctly. When dealing with shared IP addresses, I find that previous contributions are not particularly relevant as each series of incidents is typically a different user. Keeping that in mind, the user in question was warned for those two instances of vandalism and it would seem punitive to me to give him a final warning and then block him anyway with the bad-faith assumption that he would be incapable of heeding those warnings. Indeed, it seems he did heed those warnings. So, I declined even a softblock but the matter's not "closed"; you can feel free to follow up on WP:AIV and see if another administrator disagrees with me. I wouldn't take it personally. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 23:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I see. I'll be keeping an eye out on this IP then and report as needed. Zzarch (talk) 23:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 23:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative
Hi Madman,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The  Helpful  Bot  16:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Siiiii copyright issue
I'm copying this here in hopes you'll see it. When I had first created the article, the bot informed me of the copyright issue. Checked the comparison, changed the text and ran the check again. The link confirmed that there were no matches with copyright material and the currently posted link STILL shows that there are no matches with copyrighted material. http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/duplicationdetector/compare.php?url1=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSiiiii&url2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.siiiii.co.uk%2Fbio.html&minwords=3&minchars=13&removequotations=&removenumbers=

I feel this copyright issue may be in error. Please advise.Thedeathsound


 * Also, Paul Devine of Siiiii contacted me wondering how to best go about clearing this up, granting permission or whathave you, for Siiiii's page.


 * Thanks! Thedeathsound (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I reviewed the text and reviewed the text on Siiiii's Web site. It is generally the same. Things have been rephrased and slightly re-ordered (hence the duplication detector result), but it's the same content. However, if Siiiii is willing to donate the content via the Donating copyrighted materials, there's no problem at all. I think the assertions of notability in the article are valid and it could be a worthwhile addition to the encyclopedia. I'm also willing to have someone else on WP:CP or WP:SCV look over the article again, but my opinion is it's the same content. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 22:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

reg: removal of Knowledge based community sharing system
Hi madman!!

please review the page Knowledge based community sharing system. It was the project scenario being done by thousands of students from India for The Great Mind challenge of IBM, a software contest. It was proposed by me and IBM accepted as its official project scenario. The problem I hope you identified would be of the document in scrid.com. scribd is meant for sharing files. And the entire doc you found in scribd is written by me.If you have any more queries pls report it to my talk page.Just revoke the deletion once again for the good sake. Thanks in advance for looking at me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthik9u (talk • contribs) 15:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Karthik9u. I'm glad to get the opportunity to follow up with you on this. I noted that your document on scribd was shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license. Unfortunately, that's incompatible with Wikipedia's license; content contributed to Wikipedia must be released under the GNU Free Documentation License or the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (which means that it can be used commercially). If you're willing to change the license on Scribd, I'd be happy to restore the page for you; if you can't or don't wish to do so, you can follow the instructions at Donating copyrighted materials (basically, just e-mailing confirmation to permissions-en at wikimedia dot org) verify your authorship and that you're donating the material to us. It's all in the interest of making sure no one's stealing your work. :) Please let me know if you have any further questions! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 20:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks madman for your quick response. Before making my option you gave for me first I want to tell the present situation of the page concept. The page created by me is my own project. It was a good idea and IBM India found that the topic is interesting and choose to use that in the student competition called THE GREAT MIND CHALLENGE. I described the proposal. Later many students across India are developing the proposal given by me. So the same doc that you find in scribd will be observed with many peoples blogs and sites. I dont think we have copy right issues here. I have a good idea and I am proposing it and publishing for the goodness of this world. Well I can remove contents of the file in www.scribd.com by seeking the uploader to remove it but you can notice the same document in many sites. The reference page of IBM TGMC has given the same doc. I mentioned the refences in the article where you find the same doc. So please dont think it is a big mistake to publish my article. Please differ your move and bring back the page "Knowledge based community sharing system". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthik9u (talk • contribs) 16:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Karthik9u. I didn't mean to give you the impression that your document/proposal had to be taken down anywhere else. We just need to confirm that it's okay for us to publish it under the GNU Free Documentation License or the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. So if you've published it anywhere and you note there that the text is available under one of said licenses, that's good enough and probably the easiest thing to do. I feel like I'm still being a little dense here with my explanations, so feel free to continue to ask follow-up questions. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 18:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

St Peter's School, Seaford
Dear Madman,<BR> Thanks for your comment on St Peter's School, Seaford entry.<BR> I am so very much at a learning stage with Wikipedia and need your help. I have read through a lot of the help pages and have a couple of comments/questions:<BR> 1. I have amended the two links to the website that I run by simply removing the 'l' from 'html' - sorted.<BR> 2. I have uploaded two photos but neither show on the Wikipedia page. Can you tell me why?<BR> 3. What additional section should I add? My website has a lot more to offer but not all relevant to Wikipedia really - or is some of it?<BR> 4. Is this the correct place to contact you? Sorry if it isn't.<BR> Very grateful for your input. Is there a better/simpler/user-friendly set of advice pages to advise me how to put material on Wikipedia? Thank you. Am I correct signing off with these four tildes? StephenCKent (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Greetings, StephenCKent! I'd be happy to help. First of all, I can follow the links now and see everything's properly licensed, so that's great! No remaining problems there. As far as the photos, I don't see that you've uploaded any photos. You'll want to go here to upload those photos, and give them the same names you specified in the article. In the description, you may also want to note that you took the pictures yourself, if applicable. As far as advice pages... I think some of the most basic pages that'll help you at this point are Help:Wiki markup (regarding organizing and formatting your page) and Help:Files (regarding uploading images and sounds). But do feel free to ask me any other questions you may have; this is indeed the correct place to contact me. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 18:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Mildred Seydell
I am appalled at your conclusion. To reply to what you alleged

Please read the articles for real, not just pulling phrases out of the air with a computer. Compare them. This is wrong! It is a wrong-headed accusation that is utterly baseless. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 23:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * As it happens, I hadn't even looked at Duplication Detector results, so your allegation that I hadn't even read the article is a little insulting itself. I did read the article, and the lead section and the first section at the very least were similar enough to the referenced URL that I believed there could be a problem. This is not a judgment of the article and it's not a judgment of you or the other excellent contributors who have been editing it. I took the trouble to write a very polite comment on your talk page; could you please do me the same courtesy?


 * Just looking at the beginning of the article, I read "breaking the gender barrier" vs. "broke the gender barrier", "nationally syndicated columnist and book author", "an attorney and businessman" vs. "a lawyer and businessman", "Her namesake was her great aunt" vs. "[she] was named for her great aunt", "She attended the Lucy Cobb Institute" vs. "She was educated at the Lucy Cobb Institute", et cetera. When these phrases are so similar and presented in the same way, it's a problem.


 * So I noted that the article may have a couple problems and needs to be investigated, by myself and other volunteers. I'm working through a backlog and unable to check against every reference right now, but I'm confident that this is an easy case that can be cleared up right away. Either others will agree with you that it's not a problem, or it'll just need a few minor rewrites. It's really not something to get upset about, okay? &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 00:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have a desktop plagiarism detector, and would be pleased to send you the results, if you want to send me an e-mail (I can be reached through Wikipedia) where I might attach them. They are PDF files. I can't dispute the similarities. We actually have had a bunch of different formulations on the first sentence, and this one was a synthesis by several editors. I had an important writer with the right credentials -- she is a major academic in this subject -- examine the article, and she was the author of the last iteration I put in for the first sentence. I don't think (but don't actually know) whether she bothered to look at the sources, as I had directed her only to the problem on the talk page and the construct of the first sentence. In any event, I mean no discourtesy. But I take my avocation as an editor very seriously, and do not suffer gratuitous and unfounded accusations in silence. I will assume good faith, and that we merely have a failure to communicate. Nevertheless, when you put up the results of the bot, I take it at face value that you mean what you say. I look forward to working with you, so that we can all get a satisfactory result, and better our work in progress. Sincerely,  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 00:55, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I look forward to working with you as well. I'm going to try to thoroughly review the article either this evening or tomorrow morning and should have suggestions at that time; usually I'll even find additional sources we can work with. It's possible (and perhaps even probable) that the small portion of the article that seemed problematic to me is all there is, and a close paraphrasing template and a small rewrite would have been a far better action to take on my part. We're all human. :) And I try very hard not to be gratuitous in flagging articles for review. I know it's hardly what you want to see when you've taken the effort to write new content for the encyclopedia, and too many hurdles have a chilling effect on content creation. This is just one of my focuses as an administrator and my effort to improve the encyclopedia and keep it free. I appreciate your effort to assume good faith as we both work toward that goal. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 01:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I suggest you start fresh in the morning. All I wanted was a really good and really well-sourced article, and a DYK. You (and others who are on the same scent) are messing with both goals. I and my collaborators write articles that are far better than most.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 01:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Posted a rewrite of the article. Then put back the immediately prior iteration which included your copyright violation investigation template. Please access the reswrite through the history. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like the awesome Moonriddengirl got to it before I could. Thank you! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 17:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

She did a great job cleaning up my rewritten article. Please see my comments on her talk pages. Glad we could all get together; I'm 'sure' (not) the article will now sail through on the DYK (I hope). It is a better article for all the mutual effort. "Don't worry, be happy!" — Bobby McFerrin <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 17:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

 * So, I always feel a little bit presumptuous with these ("With the power vested in me by, um, no one, I hereby recognize...."), but until we get an actual vested body to recognize this kind of work, it's up to us to recognize each other. So, great job! Thanks much. I, personally, am grateful. :) And I think you're doing a great service to Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :D It's one of the few backlogs with which I actually feel qualified to work. You do awesome work with WP:CP and WP:CCI yourself! And I hope to chip in a little there too when I can; there's always more to do. ;) Cheers, &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 20:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for Helping
Dear Madman,

I appreciated your deletion of Sindh Culture Day article, I realize it that It was Copy and Pasted, let me write it with proper citation. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 16:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem! The article hasn't been protected, so feel free to recreate it at any time; please just make sure when you do that the article is written entirely in your own words (you can't use the words of the Web site, even paraphrased, and then just cite the Web site). Please let me know if you have any questions or encounter any problems while writing your article. Happy editing! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 16:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Please take a look .Just wanted to keep the discussion at one place.Thanks.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:59, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! NIRAS is on my watchlist. :) &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 17:01, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks Madman for restoring the service of Emijrp/List of Wikipedians by number of edits  on mr.wikipedia. - Rahul Deshmukh Rahuldeshmukh101 (talk) 05:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem! If you need anything else, feel free to re-open the DBQ or make another. Cheers! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 12:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion Yvonne Mwale
You deleted the article because of copyright issues. The section 'Biography' had some similarities with www.yvonnemwale.com/biography. Since I'm the author of the original text and decided to donate the text to the mentioned artist as well as to Wikipedia, I asked the owner of the site to agree to donate the text under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL to the public. Please review the article for undeletion. Besides that I agree that the links to sources for the information are missing and have to be added immediately. Thanks for your assistance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthiask1979 (talk • contribs) 09:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have restored the article for you. Thank you so much for your willingness to help and your prompt attention to this matter. Happy editing! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 12:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Amalthea 12:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Answered there. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 12:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed your name on the BAG list today shortly after we talked at WT:SPI, and was surprised that I had never seen your name before, until I saw that you've been pretty much absent the whole time I've been active here. So welcome back! :) Amalthea  19:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :D &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 20:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Rigpa organization
You gave this article a clean bill of health so to speak, but the note doesn't make sense in conjunction with the bot's report. The note says the article is a properly attributed split, but the bot log is concerned that the article is a rip off of an external site and has not complained about attribution to the original article. I do believe the external site has copied off Wikipedia and that there should be no problem. Can you make sure there really is no problem with the article. Op47 (talk) 00:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Indeed there's no problem; that's why I gave it a clean bill of health. The Web site in question is a Wikipedia mirror. From its footer: "This article is copied from an article on Wikipedia.org - the free encyclopedia created and edited by online user community. The text was not checked or edited by anyone on our staff. Although the vast majority of the wikipedia encyclopedia articles provide accurate and timely information please do not assume the accuracy of any particular article. This article is distributed under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License." Cheers, &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 00:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thankyou for clearing that up and thankyou for investigating in the first place. regards Op47 (talk) 15:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

reg: removal of Knowledge based community sharing system
Hi madman!! I am glad to see your reply. I am ready to publish under the GNU Free Documentation License. Please revoke my contribution page. I will be happy to receive any guidelines you wish me to follow. Cheers!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthik9u (talk • contribs) 16:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As stated above, please indicate this in the document somewhere on the Web or e-mail this to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 19:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done mailing as indicated. Waiting to see my contribution back. Your guidance is great. Keep rocking!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthik9u (talk • contribs) 20:38, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Nanette Hassall
I'm the writer. I dispute your evaluation of this article. The Bot hit on phrases like "the Merce Cunningham Dance Company", "Dartington College," "Strider Dance Company", "Head of the Dance Department," and similar phrases that can't be changed. In no case were complete sentences used or even partial sentences. In a short article, the facts can't be changed. Do you still have the Bot report that you can review more carefully? Tattoo515 (talk) 00:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I actually didn't use the bot report at all. It was obvious that the content came from the referenced Web site; it followed its structure exactly. While every sentence may have been paraphrased, each mapped to one in the original. Articles have to be in your own words, or else they are at best derivative works, and there's no information on the referenced Web site that would indicate license to create derivative works. For more information, please see Close paraphrasing. If you're the owner of the material in question, you can see Donating copyrighted material to see how to grant permission if you'd like, and if you're not you can see Requesting copyright permission to see how to request permission. Please let me know if you have any further questions. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 01:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read the material at your link on Close paraphrasing to see the procedure you are to follow if you think you have reviewed an article which includes it. Copyright isn't about structure, it's about exact wording. Again, in a short article, the dates and facts can't be changed, so will occur in the articles in approximately the same sequence. I understand that due to recent events, copyright patrol might be more stringent; however, my account has now been cancelled. I've written nearly 800 articles and had autopatrolled privileges. It would have been appropriate to post a "speedy delete" warning on my talk page and discuss the issues before proceeding with the deletion on copyright grounds. After reading the material, I continue to dispute your actions. Tattoo515 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I believe you're mistaken when you say "Copyright isn't about structure, it's about exact wording." I think you may be correct when you say my communication was lacking; unfortunately, I sometimes neglect to let contributors know about actions taken regarding blatant copyright violations because CorenSearchBot should have already warned them. Personally, I thought the violation was blatant enough for CSD, but if you'd like I'd be happy to restore it and list it at Copyright problems to be reviewed by another administrator. Thanks, &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 01:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * This will be sufficient if you can also restore my account. Again, "blatant" copyright violation is a cut-and-paste. Paraphrase is not "blatant" violation. Tattoo515 (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Tattoo515, I've restored the article for review and contacted one of the best reviewers I know to see what she thinks. I'm also going to see if I can find some sources on my own so we can expand the article and make it less of a derivative work. Thanks! &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 01:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. However, since she's Australian and a choreographer rather than a video game, there's not that much available. Note the list of references I've already included. Pkeets (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Rewrote the article. Pkeets (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks just fine! Thanks for your understanding in this. :) &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 18:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If that's the structure you like. It's a series of lists, which are discouraged by the Wikipedia style guide, and the chonological data is lost. However, lists are never a copyright infingement, as no creative writing is involved. Again, you could have avoided the unpleasantness by asking for a rewrite in advance. Pkeets (talk) 18:25, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * (ec) Mainly I was looking at the three paragraphs of text, which look to have been rewritten well, and text still outweighs the lists. And your point is well taken. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 18:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * They're not rewritten well. It's a series of lists without chonological information. Her education: list, her employment: list, her other employment: list, her awards: list. Text is minimal. Please check the style guide. Pkeets (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you going to merge the talk pages? Editing on the talk page has not been restored. Pkeets (talk) 18:29, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll merge them. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">madman 18:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)