User talk:Matthewedwards/Archives/2009/04

WikiCup Newsletter

 * 20:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Delivered for the WikiCup by GARDEN  at 20:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC). Queries to my talk.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

April Fool's DYK for Hedgehog Pie
Thank you for your contribution to April Fool's Day 2009!  Royal broil  22:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * A-ha! I completely forgot about that! Thanks!

Thank you for the Oddball Barnstar
No, two doesn't hurt at all. I feel doubly honored and doubly oddballish! Of course, when the deletionists come to take the Hotel toilet-paper folding article away, I'm gonna get you back by WP:CANVASSing you to participate in the AfD -- payback is payback! -- Noroton (talk) 11:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

My talk page
Um, why did you delete my talk page? As far as I know, I'm not blocked. I even retain the tools to undelete it myself! --Jiang (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Terribly sorry! I was deleting User talk:Jiang. and I somehow got your page too. I've restored it now. Matthewedwards : Chat  23:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
- Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 00:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XI
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 21:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

April 2009
Please do not add content or templates to pages on Wikipedia that exceed the bandwidth limit (the limit is at least 55), as you did to List of Law & Order: Criminal Intent episodes, without giving a valid reason for the additon of the template in the edit summary. Your content added does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. --Mgfan222 (talk) 22:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's funny. Oh, and if you could fix whatever you did to my talk page, that'd be truly wonderful, because right now you've fucked up my entire talk page by encasing everything in a blue box. Cheers. And next time, you might want to try not copy/pasting a blanking/content-removal warning template from your own talk page and sticking it on someone else's when your usage is nothing to do with blanking. Matthewedwards : Chat  01:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Much appreciated. Matthewedwards : Chat  04:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

List of Wall-E awards and nominations
Mind you that Wikipedia is not a democracy and no process is generally considered a voting process. Not even FL nominations are votes, a nomination is approved or disapproved based on the arguments presented and the consensus achieved. It is of no need for me to write "Support" or "Oppose", because I expressed a discomfort with the article. The discomfort was not answered, was not discussed and thereby the issue was unresolved. Therefore, I haven't even payed attention to the nomination.

PS. The FLC page is horribly organized, you can't get around it.  Raaggio  13:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Reorganized it myself. I will post additional comments regarding the article shortly.  Raaggio  13:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No, you don't have to support or oppose. When I close the nomination, I will go through the nomination and the page and see for myself if it meets the criteria. I'll check to see whether reviewers' comments have been addressed or if there are valid arguments as to why not; the supports and opposes merely help me see what the general feelings are. Only the reviewers themselves can confirm whether they believe their concerns have been addressed; if you don't say so, I have to make the decision myself. Even if nothing was said at the FLC about your concerns, the page may have been changed to meet them anyway.

BTW, after frequenting it for over two years, successfully nominating 18 lists, being the FL director for a year, closing countless nominations, and spending hours a day on other related procedures, explaining how the FL process works isn't really necessary ;) Matthewedwards : Chat  22:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * (to Raaggio) Speaking of the FL process, please do not edit other people's comments. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Input please
There is a current discussion at WT:PW to create a list for episodes of wrestling shows, which I don't think would be a good idea. You were involved in one of the original discussions, and as the FL director, can you place your input there? Thanks.-- T ru  c o   16:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I can offer much more than what I said at the previous discussion. As a non-fan, it's just televised sports entertainment. It's not even "scripted" in the traditional sense, is it? Just the results are predetermined? What is there to list? Airdate, episode number (which WWE doesn't agree on), production codes, directors, writers (if any). What for the summary? A list of matches? Who but the diehard fan wants to know this? It's hardly encyclopedic.
 * What's next? A list of BBC televised snooker matches? Matthewedwards : Chat  22:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

???
I'm not the nominator. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, wrong one! Matthewedwards : Chat  22:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Heads up
I'm going away this weekend, leaving some time early Friday, back Sunday. You'll have to do closures this week. Just in case the very insane reviewers try to stage a coup, here's something to fight them off with. Have fun. -- Scorpion 0422  22:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC) ✅ 15 promotions, due to those put on hold during the criteria change discussions. Matthewedwards : Chat  19:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Gene Kelly filmography/archive1
✅ Dabomb87 (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It's been promoted. Matthewedwards : Chat  19:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Outline of knowledge project summary, and future direction
In response to a friend on Wikipedia who was wondering about how I've been and what I've been up to, I got to spewing about our little endeavor, and well, I got so carried away I pretty much told him everything. :) The message turned out to be a pretty good summary of what we've accomplished so far and the overall plan.

See User talk:The Rambling Man

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist   23:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

FL Dispatch
FCDW/FLCChanges, see Wikipedia talk:Featured content dispatch workshop. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you know if Scorpion is still going to do it? Matthewedwards : Chat  00:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * He is, I was just letting you know. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you Matthewedwards : Chat  01:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
In Articles for deletion/List of philosophical theories, the editor who created the nominated page mentioned that the material he used to create that list was previously AfD'd.

Therefore, the page is subject to speedy deletion (WP:G4).

Had I known this, I would have tagged it for speedy instead of nominating it for AfD. What should I do now? Withdraw the nom, and tag the article for speedy?

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist   23:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't find the page where it originally came from to look, but unless the content is completely identical, it cannot be speedied. If in doubt, it's always better to AfD in an open forum where people can discuss it. Matthewedwards : Chat  05:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

RfA
Can you transclude my RfA onto the main page? It's currently semi-protected. FredSmit (talk) 16:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like someone did it already before I came online. FWIW, I agree that it was too early, without knowing which IPs you have edited from. Maybe we'll see you there again in the future. Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat  01:51, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XII
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 17:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Section moves
There's a larger discussion taking place at WT:TV. We started it after I posted on the individual pages.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  23:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I see your name a lot at the Degrassi pages, can I ask a question? Why is all of the information on the LOE transposed from the season pages? I get that it conserves space, but it also means that unless your are familiar with the coding then you cannot make any corrections to the page because you won't know where the information is actually coming from. For instance, there is currently an error with the season 8 page--a pair of brackets "}}" is appearing just above the episode listing--which now shows up on two pages because of the way the pages are set up.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  03:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah. About two years ago I completely rewrote the DTNG episodes, creating a Lede and adding summaries, and got it Featured. About six months later I began creating the season pages using List of Lost episodes as my inspiration. The Lost episode list is transcluded, and with that already being Featured I assumed that's the way it goes, so I transcluded the Degrassi ones too when I moved the summaries to the season pages. A couple of other episode pages have done the same thing since. I understand what you're saying, and Talk:List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes makes reference to where you've mentioned the disadvantages of transcluding. I've since begun work on changing the table format at User:Matthewedwards/Sandbox/Episodes. Matthewedwards : Chat  05:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't remember if it was Degrassi or one of the other pages that was going up for FLC that I was reviewing and noticed that. I remember voicing my concern that it basically alienates IP editors that might spot an error because they probably won't know how to get to the actual text.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  11:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Borrego Beast
Trying to see if writing about the Borrego Beast as a part of Cryptozoology is ok. This is a well talked about campfire topic in San Diego California. The Anza Borrego Desert, Arroyo Tapiado Mud Caves are a well known fixture for local Boy Scouts. The story about this creature has been portraid similar to the 1989 film Tremors, which is about Graboids.

Some say this story is fictional some say they have seen or felt the creature. Some say the creature feed off of trash left behind campers (to make sure they pick up their trash). Others insist on its existance!

There is no verifiable evidence or documentation. Would this still be appropreate to post if it writen as Cryptozoology. This would fall along the lines of Bigfoot or El Chupacabra.

Thank you for your attention.

--Fxanimals (talk) 22:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. If there is no verifiable evidence or documentation, my first instinct would be to say no, per our policies on verifiability in reliable sources; however, we have various WP:WikiProjects that may be able to answer your question better than I can: WP:CRYPTIDS, WP:PARA, WP:SKEPTIC, and WP:WikiProject Alternative Views. Sorry, Matthewedwards : Chat  02:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

My reply
Hi, I suppose I would like List of Case Closed episodes (season 1) to be removed, seeing as it doesn't have a reliable general reference to meet the requirements. If you could find one, that'd be nice. Thank you DragonZero (talk) 03:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: "ruby script"
I think User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js does what you need. Gary King ( talk ) 22:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, there are three 'Sprk: cite date' functions for converting between mdy, dmy, and yyyy-mm-dd. Let me now if you need a script to do anything else. Plastikspork (talk) 06:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Do not read this one - The Hunt - Outline of knowledge WikiProject - 04/17/2009
Here's a trivia question for you...

While surveying libraries, their outline-related resources, and our coverage of them, I came across something funny...

What subclass is the Bible in the Library of Congress Classification?

Do you think they'd like this one at WP:DYK? (Nope. They didn't.)     :)

Libraries
For months, I've been sitting at a terminal in one of the largest libraries in the country, and I haven't even looked around at the available resources.

Until a few days ago.

I'm overwhelmed.

When compared to libraries, Wikipedia is small. (See Digest of Education Statistics 2008, Chapter 7:Libraries and Educational Technology Libraries, and turn to page 617).

But is that a fair comparison?

Yes.

Why?

Because we have growth potential. :)

And we cover everything, including libraries!

Guess what else I found?

Hunting for outlines
I began to study libraries and librarians, since they are experts in organizing knowledge. And of course I turned to Wikipedia to see what we had on the things I came across...

And while doing so I kept running into outlines on Wikipedia that are not (yet) part of the Outline of knowledge.

When I come across non-OOK outlines, generally I rename them, and reformat them to our standard outline format. But there is the occasional exception.

Here are some outlines I just added:


 * 1) List of energy topics --> Outline of energy (it converted great)
 * 2) List of Dewey Decimal classes --> Outline of Dewey Decimal classes (no conversion)
 * 3) Library of Congress Classification --> ??? (no rename, no conversion)

The last 2 are outlines by their very nature, and so our standard outline subheadings didn't seem to fit. So I left them as is.

I renamed the first 2, but the last one is the name of the outline, that is, the topic itself is an outline, and that outline is presented as the article's content, so I left the name as is. For now. This needs more thought.

Of course, that's not all. Concerning those last 2 outlines above...

Alternate outlines of knowledge
...not only are they outlines, but they are outlines of knowledge! Well, the top few levels, at least.

Uh, so?

What happens if we linkify them? :)

That is, what happens if we linkify their classifications to Wikipedia's outlines? :)  :)   :)

They become alternate top ends to the OOK
Yep.

What can you find?
I challenge you to find some "hidden" outlines.

I dare you to take a look around Wikipedia for hidden outlines (that is, outlines not yet hooked into the OOK), and add your kills to WP:WPOOK.

My trophies are already there.

May the hunt begin!
 Th e Tr ans hu man ist   20:29, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XIII
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 09:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

User talk deletion
I request the restoration of any user talk pages that you have deleted under the pretense of WP:CSD, such as those found here. The criteria for speedy deletion does not grant an allowance for such deletions. WP:CSD G6 is exclusively for "technical deletions" (uncontroversial cleanup), which this is certainly not. WP:CSD G5 would be closer, allowing for the deletion of "[p]ages created by banned users in violation of their ban, with no substantial edits by others." However, this criteria also fails to support your deletions. Neither criteria outlines the deletion of "[u]ser talk page[s] of [i]ndefinitely blocked user[s]", in letter or spirit. If you believe these pages should be deleted, please submit them to WP:MFD and/or work on building a consensus at WT:CSD to add an appropriate point to our criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you for your time and understanding. --Vassyana (talk) 05:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to note (as it some exceptions occured to me), that if any of those pages were attack pages or existed purely for harassment purposes, I am not requesting undeletion of such pages. If there are some diffs which are similar problematic, a partial restoration and a request for oversight of the offending unrestored diffs would be most appropriate. --Vassyana (talk) 06:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I'm going through them all at the moment. There's quite a few.. Matthewedwards : Chat  06:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. Here's a list of User talk pages that I have G6'ed.


 * User talk:Sandove89 Indef blocked on 7 October 2005, talk page unedited since 27 March 2006
 * User talk:DickyRobert Indef blocked on 7 October 2005, talk page unedited since 31 January 2006
 * User talk:Tony Senatore Indef blocked on 24 May 2007, talk page unedited since 4 June 2007
 * User talk:Mindspillage II Indef blocked on 20 September 2005, talk page unedited since 20 September 2005
 * User talk:64.92.174.42 Indef blocked on 13 November 2005, talk page unedited since 30 May 2006, IP is an open [[proxy server|proxy] belonging to http://www.www.proxyking.net
 * User talk:AnYoNe! Indef blocked on 6 June 2007, talk page fully protected and unedited since 6 June 2007
 * User talk:Enigmaz Indef blocked on 29 March 2007, talk page fully protected and unedited since 29 March 2007
 * User talk:GWP Indef blocked on 27 March 2008, talk page blocked on 28 March 2008, only edit after that was an IfD notification on 13 December 2008
 * User talk:Mindspillage the Bandit Indef blocked on 27 September 2005, talk page last edited 27 September 2005
 * User talk:D'Arby Indef blocked on 1 November 2005, talk page last edited 29 September 2005
 * User talk:Gibraltarian Indef blocked on 16 December 2005, talk page fully protected on 21 January 2006, and last edited on 7 February 2007 when it was blanked
 * User talk:Dschor Indef blocked on 25 May 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 25 May 2006
 * User talk:Lilina Indef blocked on 17 February 2007, talk page fully protected and last edited on 17 February 2007
 * User talk:Steveymcsteverson Indef blocked on 19 August 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 19 August 2005
 * User talk:Cursa Indef blocked on 14 October 2006, talk page last edited on 27 March 2006
 * User talk:Wiki.en Herausgeber'auf Käse Indef blocked on 29 August 2005, talk page fully protected on 17 August 2005, last edited on 16 May 2006
 * User talk:MarkSweepsPubicHairsFromHisPaIms Indef blocked on 15 August 2005, talk page fully protected on 22 February 2006, and last edited on 9 September 2006
 * User talk:Coqsportif Indef blocked on 19 August 2005, fully protected and last edited on 19 August 2005
 * User talk:Quadeļl Indef blocked on 5 August 2005, talk page fully protected on 5 August 2005, and last edited on 13 September 2006
 * User talk:Hamster Sandwich. Indef blocked on 24 August 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 24 August 2005
 * User talk:Maoririder Indef blocked on 16 March 2006, talk page last edited on 27 March 2006
 * User talk:WiIfried Derksen Indef blocked on 20 July 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 20 July 2005
 * User talk:Rainbowwarrior1977 Indef blocked on 24 September 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 17 July 2008
 * User talk:Zephram Stark Indef blocked on 14 May 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 17 May 2006
 * User talk:Cognition Indef blocked on 15 May 2006, talk page fully protected on 15 May 2006, last edited on 18 May 2006
 * User talk:Blu Aardvark Indef blocked on 18 July 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 18 July 2006
 * User talk:TheUnforgiven Indef blocked on 12 August 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 12 August 2005
 * User talk:Jebus Christ Indef blocked on 13 July 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited 2 July 2006
 * User talk:Xed Indef blocked on 12 July 2006, talk page last edited on 18 July 2006
 * User talk:Dittoboy Indef blocked on 14 June 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited 23 April 2006
 * User talk:No Account Indef blocked on 9 December 2005, talk page last edited 10 September 2006
 * User talk:AI Indef blocked on 6 September 2007, talk page fully protected and last edited on 3 July 2006
 * User talk:Amorrow Indef blocked on 9 August 2005, talk page fully protected 1 June 2006, last edited on 14 February 2008
 * User talk:Mookore 2005 Indef blocked on 6 January 2007, talk page fully protected and last edited (blanked) on 6 January 2007
 * User talk:SORBS DNSBL Indef blocked on 18 June 2005, talk page fully protected and blanked on 19 May 2007
 * User talk:Mitrebox Indef blocked on 1 February 2008, talk page fully protected and last edited on 12 August 2006
 * User talk:Willy on wheels Indef blocked on 15 January 2008, talk page fully protected and last edited on 13 December 2005
 * User talk:RJII Indef blocked on 24 June 2006, talk page last edited on 19 June 2007
 * User talk:Spinoza1111 Indef blocked on 25 October 2006, talk page protected on 5 Nov 2006, last edited on 24 October 2007 (AWB subst:'ing edit)
 * User talk:Norm Indef blocked on 7 September 2007, talk page fully protected and last edited on 3 January 2007
 * User talk:Gazwim Indef blocked on 19 February 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 27 May 2008
 * User talk:Alberuni Indef blocked on 24 July 2006, talk page last edited on 26 May 2007
 * User talk:Rydel Indef blocked on 28 May 2007
 * User talk:Clayboy Indef blocked on 6 March 2007, talk page fully protected and blanked on 7 March 2007
 * User talk:Gazpacho Indef blocked on 28 January 2008, talk page fully protected and last edited on 24 December 2007
 * User talk:Benapgar Indef blocked on 24 March 2006, talk page last edited on 25 March 2006
 * User talk:Herschelkrustofsky Indef blocked on 27 October 2007, talk page last edited on 6 November 2007
 * User talk:Plautus satire Indef blocked on 6 September 2006, talk page fully protected, and last edited (blanked) on 20 October 2007
 * User talk:Misterrick Indef blocked on 15 December 2006, last talk page edit, an image delete notification, on 5 October 2008
 * User talk:Cccc Indef blocked on 5 June 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 7 June 2006
 * User talk:Lir Indef blocked on 7 March 2008, talk page fully protected and last edited on 11 March 2008
 * User talk:FUCKING UNBLOCK ME YOU FUCKING MOTHERFUCKERS!!! Indef blocked on 7 October 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited 7 October 2006
 * User talk:Jiang. Indef blocked on 26 August 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 23 September 2006
 * User talk:Jiang -- Somehow got caught in the above, and I immediately restored when I noticed
 * User talk:Iasson Indef blocked on 22 May 2006, talk page last edited on 20 May 2007. It seems when this was deleted the user was able to recreate it.
 * User talk:195.188.152.16 Indef blocked on 22 April 2007 IP is indef blocked by CU, but I've restored this one.
 * User talk:Musachachado Indef blocked on 17 July 2005, talk page fully protected and last edited on 22 July 2008 (This one had a sockpuppetcheckuser template; I've restored it.
 * User talk:Thekohser Indef blocked on 20 July 2007 talk page fully protected and blanked on 29 October 2008. User:Risker restored this earlier this evening.
 * User talk:MutterErde Indef blocked on 15 April 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 24 January 2008 (this is bluelinked because of a recent bot notification)
 * User talk:67.86.88.191 Indef blocked on 12 August 2006, talk page fully protected and last edited on 12 August 2006; I've restored this one.
 * User talk:Sweet Blue Water -- Talk page indef perm protected. This one admittedly was wrong. I didn't notice he had been unblocked by Jimbo himself (of all people!), so I've restored it.

Talk pages of indefinitely blocked users are put into Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages after a suitable time to allow them to appeal the block. Users blocked between 2005 and 2007 have had sufficient time to appeal their block. If they haven't done it yet, they're not going to. There are only three exceptions to this; users who are not indef-blocked, IP addresses, and user talk pages tagged with blocked or confirmed. User:Jiang was not blocked, but got caught up in the delete I did on User talk:Jiang.; I restored that as soon as I realised. Same with User:Sweet Blue Water. His is now restored. There are 3 IPs. I've restored 2, the third is from an open proxy. It will never be unblocked, and there is no need to have a talk page for it. The rest I feel were OK deletes. Talk pages of indef blocked users have been getting deleted for many years. The Category page doesn't say they have to be taken to MfD; it says they are temp pages and implied (to me) that they can be deleted without process, ie speedied. CSD-G6, Non-controversial maintenance, seems to be the best fit. As well as that, we have an admin bot approved to do the same: User:CAT:TEMP deletion bot.

It's really late now (1.30 am), so I'm going to bed. I will discuss this further tomorrow though. Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat  08:31, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I must embarassingly admit that this has flown under my radar for quite some and I'm just now becoming fully aware of it. My principal concern is that in many cases that this neutral at best, and unhelpful in some cases where it obscures history. Thank you very much for such a complete and polite response. I truly and sincerely appreciate it. This seems to be an issue to raise for general discussion at the appropriate venues (one which has had only a few small discussions that tapered off or heavily focused on IP talk pages), rather than one to hash out with you directly. Thank you again and be well! --Vassyana (talk) 08:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI, I have raised the issue for discussion: Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy. Also, I neglected to thank you for undertaking tedious maintenance tasks, so thank you for undertaking them. :) --Vassyana (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, it's no problem. Rules around here change as often as the tide. I'll let the discussion play out; if consensus is that they shouldn't be deleted, then I won't. If people think the ones that have been deleted should be restored, I don't mind doing that either. Best, Matthewedwards : Chat  21:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like to request that User talk:Rydel also be undeleted, as this was the talk page of a deceased wikipedian, and should be preserved for posterity. Thanks, Matt (talk) 19:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅, cheers! Matthewedwards : Chat  19:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

ping
More mail. Tvoz / talk 17:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

List of CMLL World Heavyweight Champions FLC??
I saw that you removed the List of CMLL World Heavyweight Champions from the Featured List Candidate list and said "9 promoted, 2 failed" - since the article wasn't promoted and is still a "B" class I assume it failed? Nowhere does it say it's failed or why, it was just removed. Since there were plenty of support votes and all issues have been resolved I'm more than a little puzzled by this. Am I just impatient and it'll be promoted soon? did it fail? or was it removed by mistake?? MPJ-DK (talk) 07:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It was promoted, for some reason the Bot hasn't completed the archiving process yet. If it doesn't do it by tomorrow, I may do it myself. The bot's operator may be unable to run it right now. Matthewedwards : Chat  00:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll add FLCClosed for clarification. BTW, I'll be out till Monday. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I'll add it to the rest too. Don't know why the bot didn't do it; it did the FLRCs and FACs. Matthewedwards : Chat  02:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, never mind, GimmeBot just started the botifying process. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. Matthewedwards : Chat  06:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Today's FLC closures
Just in case you were going to do FLC closures, would you mind holding off for a few more hours? I haven't looked at them for a while and I wanted to have a chance to do so. I'm going away for a few hours, but I'll be back around 4 or 5 (EST). Thanks, Scorpion 0422  17:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I sent you an email. Matthewedwards : Chat  19:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XIV
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 14:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

FLC or FA
Well, the way they are now I could see them as GA. But, I'd have a hard time seeing them as FA because there really isn't that much production discussed about the episodes. And what's in the production section isn't entirely production information. It starts by introducing the reader to what the show is, which isn't production information. Just about the entire first paragraph on the season 1 page is just identifying what the show does. The second paragraph just provides details about the show's season, like number of episodes and who was the executive producer. Not saying that isn't good info, just that it's really not production info (at least not in the sense of what went into making the show). So, I think you're fine for GA, because it's about broad coverage, but I think any hiccup will occur with an FAN because of the issue of comprehensibility.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  23:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, there's no deadline, so maybe FA somewhere down the line! Thanks for responding, Matthewedwards : Chat  23:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured list log
Separate to that, do you know why the current month's log isn't being transcluded at Featured list candidates/Featured log, like it is at Featured list candidates/Failed log? Right now it's just a link to the page. (They look the same in edit mode. I can't figure it out.) Matthewedwards : Chat  02:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, very strange. I can't figure it out either. Hopefully it sorts itself out by the time I return. See you in a couple days. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:02, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for looking. It's been like that since at least 2007. I guess it's no big deal. Have a good time away. Matthewedwards : Chat  03:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is happening because there are too many template transclusions in Featured list candidates/Featured log/April 2009, most likely because of the overuse of hidden templates. Gary King  ( talk ) 03:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's good to know. Should we be asking people to not cap their comments, like FAC, then? Matthewedwards : Chat  04:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If transcluding the log is important to have, then people will indeed have to use fewer templates. Gary King  ( talk ) 04:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I suppose it depends on how many people visit it. Matthewedwards : Chat  06:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Would you like people to remove some caps then? Dabomb87 (talk) 13:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. If people don't use the logs, then there may not be much point. I certainly wouldn't want people to de-cap comments for noms that have already been botified, but perhaps asking people to not do it from now on might be worth thinking about. Matthewedwards : Chat  18:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should remove WP:Featured list tools from completed nominations. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup. Scorpion has asked Gimmetrow if FLC can do nominations the same way FAC is, so maybe it's something he can do at the same time. Matthewedwards : Chat  05:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Need your help
Hi! Could you please move back the article Kendō to Kendo? It was my mistake and I am asked to move back. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 04:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Matthewedwards : Chat  05:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 05:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)