User talk:Muhandes/Archive 2

DYK for Point Charles Light
-- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cape Don Light
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Freya von Moltke
Dear Muhandes, You appear to know what you were doing, when you deleted a number of external links in Freya von Moltke, citing External links: WP:ELNO #1. When I read the WP:ELNO #1 citation, it was so succinct that I didn't understand its intent. Perhaps you could explain it more clearly, so I can understand why removing the external links in question is appropriate. Sincerely, --User:HopsonRoad 13:58, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It appears that you might have given me too much credit (thank you!). I thought removing obituaries from article external links section was consensus. There was some discussion about it in the past, but not much. Basically rule #1 means that if all the external link (obituary in this case) includes is information which would appear in the article anyway (if it was a perfect article), then it does not belong in the external links section, it belongs in the article itself. An obituary is, almost by definition, material which should be added to the article. However, it seems like there is no real consensus about this. For example HaeB, which also "knows what he is doing" reverted some of them. Rather than start a war on this, I will revert these edits whenever they are questioned, until I manage to get more opinions. Best regards and happy editing. --Muhandes (talk) 16:55, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply, Muhandes. My thought is that the links are a valuable resource to draw upon in improving the article. Once new aspects are incorporated in the article, then the link can become a citation or disappear if there's a better citation. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 23:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Point Charles Light
I am a telecom consultant that has had a long familiarly with the Darwin Relay station. My only source for the breakdown of the CVC Darwin Relay Station is Glen Hauser's World of Radio. Possibly there may be a second source at Radio Netherlands Media Network blog. However, finding the exact link alluded when I made the update. Trust me, the relay station is no more -- but nominal access via road to the light has returned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyreland (talk • contribs)
 * Find, I'll leave it with cn. You might want to consider reporting it to http://www.lighthouse.net.au/, they like keeping tabs of access to lighthouses. --Muhandes (talk) 10:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Emery Point Light
-- Cirt (talk) 12:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

santana discography
hello,

I didn't know this template. I will replace it. :)-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 12:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh I see you reverted it.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 12:13, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Reverted and improved. Let me know if there is any problem. --Muhandes (talk) 12:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: Stripped (Christina Aguilera album)
The reason to name it the second album is that Aguilera herself considers it to be so (I forgot the interview she gave regarding this). The albums preceding Stripped were one christmas and one spanish. Actually, it is her second English language studio album. Hope it's clear. Thanks. No vice 7  (Talk)  09:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * In that case, perhaps it is best to say that, or even better, add a source? I am going to add "English language" to the lead, though wasn't the Christmas album in English? I'll leave that the experts. --Muhandes (talk) 10:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism
Thank you for your report at Administrator intervention against vandalism about 64.180.39.74's editing at Western Asia and elsewhere. Actually this was not a case of vandalism, but rather one of content dispute and edit warring. In such cases it is better to consider dispute resolution, and if it is necessary to make a report to administrators, then one of the Administrators' noticeboards, most likely Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, is more likely to be appropriate than Administrator intervention against vandalism. On this occasion I decided to deal with the matter anyway, but for future reference I thought it might help you if I point out that reporting to AIV when the issue is not really vandalism is usually ineffective, as an admin will just reject the report. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:06, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the pointer, will do next time. --Muhandes (talk) 12:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Detroit-Osborn High School
Thank you for the clarification, re. editing-out of Notable OHS Alumni. Here's the thing: Detroit can use all the help that history-minded folks can lend; deleting the high school achievements of these Osborn graduates is a step in the wrong direction. We can not possibly base the notion of "notability" upon whether -or not-someone has a personal Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckjav (talk • contribs)
 * I'm sorry if I was misunderstood. Having an article is not a requirement, but having an article establishes notability. Though not all agree, it is my opinion that you can establish notability in other ways as well, either in the article itself, or at least in the talk page. But frankly, I doubt you'll be able to establish athlete notability. Since I doubt they have participated in a major international amateur or professional competition, and they don't seem to have won their country's senior national championship or held a world record, etc., at least one of which is required. If I am mistaking, feel free to supply a reliable source that shows they are notable and include them. --Muhandes (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Detroit-Osborn High School; thank you for replying. I will continue to broaden my search for additional information on these alumni. Two of the three fared well in post-interscholastic athletics; I will make certain these (and others) are more suitably documented as worthy candidates.

chuckjav
 * You just restored them without resolving the issue. These alumni are not notable. WP:NLIST requires that they will be. This applies to any list of people, you can call it "alumni", "hall of fame" or whatever name you wish. Please stop introducing them time and again without establishing athlete notability first. --Muhandes (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No, actually in this case it would have been appropriate to settle things "on the court". Seriously/honestly, though...by listing the aforementioned graduates as members of Osborn's "Athletic Hall of Fame", it would serve to mitigate the notoriety issue. The notable alumni need only be compared to folks that attended Osborn; rather than the rest of America and/or the world (in terms of athletic accolades). This seems fair & plausible.

chuckjav


 * No, it doesn't. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The notability guidelines say what an encyclopedia should and what it shouldn't discuss. And you are wasting both our time on a triviality - it adds nothing to an encyclopedia article to know that some student won some state championship in 1988. Zero. However, this takes too much energy, so I went ahead and wrote a prose section mentioning the students who won state titles. I don't think someone who took the 14th position in a state championship is notable even under the weakest requirements. --Muhandes (talk) 12:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Very well done; thank you for the nicely written revision. Believe-you-me, I can appreciate what you've said about trivialities and such; there is some pretty lame stuff on Wikipedia.

chuckjav

Mama
Hi sorry for that revert, but the first one that you did to the article wasn't the same as the second edit. That was actually a direct link to the certification page, I rverted because it changed the format of the other references, but I see that it's better now. I have a small request though, could you change the hyphen in "Gold/Platin-Datenbank" to an endash "Gold/Platin–Datenbank". Thanks and sorry again for the revert. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frcm1988 (talk • contribs)
 * No harm done, it is a new template and more than one editor reverted it. I'm happy to say so far all editors find it an improvement. I've change the hypen to an endash. Thanks for the feedback, and best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to say thanks for coming uo with this wonderful template. Cheers for using the en-dash too. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 06:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome. Maybe some day when I have more time a more generic approach to certification can be taken. --Muhandes (talk) 10:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, I think you can develop similar templates for the BPI, RIAA, RIANZ etc. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 05:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

led zep
hello,

can you explain me why there should be one additional quotation mark after "The Ocean"?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:09, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you are missing something. You're edit is the one that added the quotation mark, mine was the one that removed it. --Muhandes (talk) 11:12, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * oops sry.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. I made that mistake BIG TIME once, reverting some IP who kept insisting that "XXX sucks ballz" is inappropriate, and me warning him that he is vandalizing and restoring that statement over and over again *blush*. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Dinakaran
hi muhandes,

how are you? i appreciate you sending me the message about reverting my changes. i also appreciate you being polite and mature in your message unlike some. the reason i included a Hindi name was for all the non-Tamil Indians (which is millions) reading the article to know how to pronounce the name. otherwise Dinakaran could be pronounced டினகரன். besides, dinakaran is published in other parts of India like Delhi and Mumbai too.

let me give you an example. i thought ADVANI (L. K. Advani, the B.J.P leader) was அத்வானி until i saw the Hindi spelling and realized it's not அத்வானி but அட்வானி. and MARATHI is not மராத்தி but மராட்டி.

i thought we could avoid all this ambiguity by spelling it out in Hindi which is like the common national language. so now, i leave it to you to decide whether or not you still want to include the Hindi name.

Best Regards. Chanvis18 (talk) 10:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point. I thought there was a guideline about it, but I cannot find it, so I guess common sense will do, and what you say makes sense. I'll add the Hindi as well. --Muhandes (talk) 09:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * thanks. Chanvis18 (talk) 10:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * i forgot to ask, what is the "interwiki link" you were referring to? let me know please because i don't think it was me.....thanks & bye. Chanvis18 (talk) 05:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In this edit you added a link to the Hindi wiki, but the article does not exist in the Hindi wiki under the name you used. --Muhandes (talk) 06:07, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Norah Head Light
There is one thing that needs your attention for the GA nomination.-- intelati  talk  01:32, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Guidance barnstar

 * Thank you :) --Muhandes (talk) 21:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Archer Point Light
Orlady (talk) 12:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bay Rock Light
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Richmond River Light
I think I see where the "end of Burri Point Road" reference may have crept in (your edit of 29 August 2010), but I am certain it is incorrect for this lighthouse (there in no such street in Ballina, or indeed for the entire district.) On the other hand states that Burrewarra Point Lighthouse near Batemans Bay stands at the end of such a street. Please do you recall your source for the original edit (and yes, I realise it was a fair while ago, now)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AuFCL (talk • contribs) 01:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I must have been writing the two articles around the same time and a sentence meant to be in one of them somehow crept into the other. Thanks for correcting it. --Muhandes (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Visendo fax server
Hi,

Regardig the Proposed deletion of Visendo fax server, what is exactly the problem with ? After latest update, the article is almost same with initial the version before update, even with more sources and improvements.

Regarding - Also an obvious WP:COI please be more specific, Visendo is registered trademark of ppedv AG and is one of the most innovative solution on European Communication Market.

let us know, what are the concerns or other issues now.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumian (talk • contribs)


 * As stated in the deletion discussion my concern is mainly notability. "A topic is deemed appropriate for inclusion if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources." No such sources were provided, and I can find none myself. All sources provided are primary. As such, the article becomes suspicious of promotion. As for conflict of interest, you have personally edited only this single article. All other editors which edited the article also seem to edit only articles regarding ppedv AG. This suggests you are all affiliated with ppedv AG in some way, and should therefore avoid this article altogether since you lack a neutral point of view. --Muhandes (talk) 08:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Booby Island Light
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Sandy Cape Light
Today I started the Sandy Cape article. Can you confirm you are working towards and/or would you be able to create Sandy Cape Light or Sandy Cape Lightstation in the near future? I ask because you have created similar articles in the past. This would remove one of the last red links from the Fraser Island article which is nearing GA status. - Shiftchange (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I am currently going through Queensland lighthouses alphabetically, creating articles for every lighthouse that does not have one yet. If it is of importance to you I have no problem making Sandy Cape Light the next one, especially as I just finished writing the article on its sibling, Bustard Head Light. Let me know. --Muhandes (talk) 07:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes please, go for it. I will fix incoming wikilinks to Sandy Cape Light. - Shiftchange (talk) 07:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 19:56, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bustard Head Light
Courcelles 12:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

deleting my edits
What's with deleting my edits on Please Don't Go by KC and the sunshine band, as well as Don't Bring Me Down (The Animals song), my point being the latter influenced the former. It's pretty darn obvious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.165.110 (talk • contribs)
 * You still need a source for verification. --Muhandes (talk) 06:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fotegrafik logo.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Fotegrafik logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  04:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sandy Cape Light
Hello! Your submission of Sandy Cape Light at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! AgneCheese/Wine 02:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Old Caloundra Light
Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Bhutan's present regime
Hi,

You reversed my change to the article about Bhutan. There was a little paragraph describing present democratic changes. I think it is fair and balanced to add that there is still much work to do in Bhutan to talk about democracy, the country is a totalitarian system and people might be "happy" there but when one is speaking about a political regime it would not be right just to say that there is a democracy - to say A, but remain silent about B. I think you might have agreed with my already, you would just place it elsewhere. But where then? Wikipedia should not be about deleting but rather collaborating and letting grow. If you think it deserves another place and maybe more information, go ahead and do the work. Now it seems you are just shutting down a voice talking about limited freedoms and problems. Please, reconsider and let me know. I might be rash and your intension and reason was good. Thank you w.0q (talk) 23:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You are reading too much into this. I saw a sentence which was not related to history in the history section. I removed it. I agree the current text lacks POV so I will trim it so it deals with history alone. Your text belongs in a "civil rights" section. --Muhandes (talk) 06:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explanation! I'm not experienced in this. What is POV please? And where is the civil rights section. I see none and it is to me like the facts about the freedoms in the country are not mentioned anywhere. If you are going to work on this, you have my appreciation! Thanks --w.0q (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The article's lines about democracy were from a singular point of view (the government's most likely), so by removing them I was keeping a neutral point of view. There is no civil rights section, you are free to start one. I'm not going to work on this as I have no expertise on the subject. --Muhandes (talk) 16:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, now the article looks different. Before there was this celebrating sentence about "new era of democracy" when I came, didn't delete it but rather added "but there are still freedoms issues found by the Freedom house". Later you came and deleted this my sentence only. That's why I started this talk. Now both sentences are gone and that's better than having only one side. But isn't having both of them better? In the end, both are correct as there is a shift to democracy but which is still flawed as Freedom house recognizes, and who is more neutral than the most credible independent research unit on civil rights than FH? I thought having both is better and that's how wikipedia growths and is. Sure, special section would be the finest solution but who is going to write it all at once if we keep deleting stuff that is not perfect rather than letting an article growth and expand? I reckon you are more experienced wikipedist, you tell me. --w.0q (talk) 23:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia grows by adding material from secondary sources, not personal opinions of editors. I'm sorry if I wasn't clearer, but the sentence about "new era to democracy" not only lacked neutrality but was also original research and unsourced. If you want to restore it, you need to find some reliable secondary source saying it, say a New Your Times editorial, and then put something like 'The New York Times called it "a new era to democracy', with the source. What you are suggesting is correcting one wrong (an unsourced OR) by creating a second wrong (a sentence which is unrelated to the section in which it is mentioned). And what's this about "we keep deleting stuff that is not perfect"? Who is this "we"? I did one single drive-by revert because I saw something I felt should be improved so I fixed it. This isn't about "deleting stuff that is not perfect", it is about improving what you think should be improved. And if you think the subject of human rights in Bhutan is important, start a section about it. To paraphrase and answer your question, "who is going to write it?" - "You are". --Muhandes (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sandy Cape Light
Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sea Hill Light
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Liberation (film series)
Thanks! I appreciated your edits. Bahavd Gita (talk) 08:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Just minor improvements, you are welcome. --Muhandes (talk) 08:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for New Caloundra Light
Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Impressed
Hi, I've just seen the New Caloundra Light article. Although I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and can't speak from the lofty heights of administrator-hood, I'd just like to say congratulations for getting an article onto DYK. In particular, I'm very impressed that the article required so little change before reaching that achievement. I've recently been attempting to de-orphan articles and have come across all kinds of garbage, spam and edit wars. It's from those negative experiences that I offer my respect. Sincerely, --~ ~ : Lincoln Cooper : ~  ~ (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, it is not often enough that fellow editors show appreciation. The trick for me is to do it right the first time. I write the article in my own sandbox and only release it when I think it is quite ready. --Muhandes (talk) 11:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Grassy Hill Light
Hello! Your submission of Grassy Hill Light at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Grassy Hill Light
Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

User talk:87.112.133.93
I notice you just added a warning to User talk:87.112.133.93 about unsourced edits. It might be worth your while upgrading the strength of this warning in the light of this user's other edits, all of which are (to be charitable) unsourced or (to be blunt) vandalism. I have reverted all that have not been already. Emeraude (talk) 11:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Good catch. I usually check other edits, I guess I was distracted. I added another warning, but there is not much else to do now. --Muhandes (talk) 13:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Emeraude (talk) 13:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

WUKO
I redirected the WUKO article to the WKF article since the WUKO page contained no information that wasn't already in the WKF article. There seemed to be no reason to have separate articles. I didn't remove the information or eliminate the WUKO article, just tied the two articles together. The WKF article contains more information so I made that the primary article. Why do you think we need two copies of the same info? Papaursa (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * First, regarding the technicalities, if you make a redirect, you should remove the material, otherwise the article remains categorized, it's text remains open for bots and editors to maintain etc. There is no such thing as "tied the two articles together" in Wikipedia - a redirect removes one article in favour of another. This was what I meant with my edit summary.
 * To the issue itself, after the events described in the article, WUKO went through two more iterations, in 2005 and in 2009, which would not appear in the WKF article. I think a better approach then redirecting the article (thus in practice removing it) is to add the relevant information, which I just did. Best regards, and happy new year. --Muhandes (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information about both redirecting an article and WUKO itself. Papaursa (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cape Capricorn Light
Thanks from me and the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 17:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Amtrak ridership citations
I have added citations to all of my recent edits. However, I would like you to realize that of the 507 current Amtrak stations with wikipedia entries, fully 40% failed to have any citations. Much of the information in these articles should be referenced, especially compared to the ridership data I contribute. I will emphasize again that the data I use comes directly from Amtrak.com PDFs nearly universally listed in the 'External Links' section of each article but, as I have now referenced all of this data, the issue is moot.

Frankly, I found your entry on my Talk page to be condescending. I trust that when you contact other Wikipedians with whom you take issue that you will attempt to be more tactful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwhit244 (talk • contribs) 05:27, 7 January 2011
 * English is my third language, based mostly on academic correspondence and literature, so I apologize if what I see as a polite request for sources comes out as condescending. I never raised any doubt on the validity of your data, just requested that you add the source, per WP:V. As for the sad state of Amtrak station articles I'm afraid I can't help as I don't have any information or knowledge about the subject. Best regards, and happy editing. --Muhandes (talk) 07:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Point Danger Light
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Please read!!!!
It seams that you spent all of your life in Wikipedia! Do you have any other useful work in this world ?!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usa26 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for caring. I am working two full time jobs (as a professor and as a consultant). I have a wife, two kids, parents, uncles, nephews and other relatives which I regularly spend time with. I have several other interests and hobbies outside Wikipedia as well. How to fit it all into 24 hours a day is indeed a complex optimization problem. Lets just say I don't sleep much. --Muhandes (talk) 12:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for a non-specialist Wikipedia community.


 * But I hesitate somewhat in your first job as a professor !


 * Many times, I added a section to the GridFTP protocol called as DotDFS but you with all of your time had been monitoring this topic !!!!


 * I must notice that this new protocol in the near future will be become an IETF standard. THUS, with a non-reasonable and non-specialist people in Wikipedia community, I will not inform the researchers from my international activities mr. Professor here!


 * have a good time with Wikipedia!!!!!


 * Goodbye!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usa26 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 13 January 2011 (UTC)  Previous message slightly formatted for ease of discussion
 * Hey, I never said anything about my credentials until you mentioned a concern about my life. In wikipedia credentials are irrelevant, and using credentials in an argument is an argument from authority, a fallacy. My actions were based solely on notability of the research and on conflict of interests. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Slade
Hello, just like to say thank you for your help in relation to the Slade singles. I wouldn't have known overwise. Ajsmith141 (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, it was just an honest mistake by CanadianLinuxUser. --Muhandes (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fitzroy Island Light
The DYK project (nominate) 18:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UKHO logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:UKHO logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hugahoody (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cape Bowling Green Light
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   06:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Lady Elliot Island Light
Nice article. I commented at your DYK nom. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Point Stephens Light
The article Point Stephens Light you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Point Stephens Light for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Jezhotwells (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Muhandes (talk) 06:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors
I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am flattered and tempted, but then I remember I already have two jobs, a family, and some hobbies to take care of (Wikipedia being one of them), and the last thing I need (or indeed can handle) is another commitment. Maybe some other time. Thank you. --Muhandes (talk) 06:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

What transliteration is this?
This transliteration is the ALFB NewWay romanization, which shows all special arabic characters, like: ë=ة; ıª=ى; ө=ط; ª=superscripted aliph; º=hamzah (ء) and so on. It also uses o for ع letter. The aim is to help to represent and restore all Arabic letters in the Latin script. This transliteration has also some varieties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.220.33.64 (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure there is consensus to prefer DIN, ISO or ALA transliterations, all of which are supported by transl where NewWay isn't. It's better than nothing I suppose, but we need to find the correct way to add it before massively adding to all articles without a previous transliteration. I'll ask around. I ask that for now you don't replace existing transliterations with ALFB or add it when another already exists until consensus can be determined. --Muhandes (talk) 09:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, here I'm showing one of the variants of this transliteration to judge it:

ا = Aa, Áá; ﺁ = Ãã; ب = Bb; ت = Tt; ث = Ŧŧ (Unicode: 0166, 0167); ج = Cc (if pronounced like English j), Gg (if pronounced like  ג ) ;

ح = Hh; خ = Ċċ or Ƈƈ (Unicode 0187, 0188); د = Dd; ذ = Đđ; ر = Rr; ز = Zz; س = Ss; ش = Śś; ص = Ƨƨ (Unicode 01A7, 01A8); ض = Ɗƌ (Unicode 018A, 018C); ط = Өө; ظ = Ƶƶ (Unicode 01B5, 01B6); ع = Oo; غ = Ơơ (Unicode 01A0, 01A1); ف = Ff; ق = Qq; ك = Kk; ل = Ll; م = Mm; ن = Nn; ه = Ee; و = Uu - as a consonant, Úú - as a long vowel, Ʋʋ (Unicode 01B2, 028B) - as damma; ي = Ii as a consonant, Íí - as a long vowel, Ɩɩ (Unicode 0196, 0269) - as kasra; ى = Iªıª; ة = Ëë; ء = º; أ = Åå or ºAºa; إ = Unicode 1E00, 1E01 or ºIºi; ؤ = Ůů or ºUºu; ئ = ºIºi or Ii+Unicode 030A; The doubled i and u are represented like Îî; Ûû, so the circumflex accent (Unicode 0302) is used as shaddah as well as ̑ - the inverted breve (Unicode 0311); Ăă is used for aliph with waslah. - Unicode 0309 - the hook - is used as a sukun (no vowel after a consonant); ª, as clear, is used for little superscripted aliph. a undefined - rare subscribed aliph. (Optionally: as tanwins - un, an, in - ", ¨ , .. . So, a, u, and i can be represented like: · , ' , and . ). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.220.33.64 (talk) 13:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * It is not me you need to convince, take it to WP:ARAB or to WP:AMOS. --Muhandes (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for interrupting you and thanks for information and support. Would you said me: are you and people around you satisfied in this transliteration; and how can we found the right way to add it.

P.S.:I will be grateful if you answer these questions.


 * Before going onwards, may I suggest that you open an account? It's much easier to discuss this way.
 * As I said before, you should probably ask in WP:ARAB what they think. I doubt they will agree that replacing DIN, ISO or ALA transliterations with something that was invented last year is a good idea, but perhaps they will tell you what the best way to do it is. --Muhandes (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try. But traditions can be stronger than innovation. 62.220.33.64 (talk)

62.220.33.64 (talk)Good day! I tried to do what you advised me, but what about the consensus - I don't know. By the way, do you think, should I speak with user Avraham to clear some facts?

Note: the letter ɑ was added to avoid confusing of letter aliph and fatha (symbol for short sound /a/).


 * First, let me repeat my suggestion to open an account and ease communication. You already used two IP addresses and addressing the correct editor is already difficult.
 * I saw your post in WT:ARAB but I'm not sure how you expect other editors to respond when you did not initiate any discussion. Make a proposal or ask a question and maybe someone will respond.
 * As for your communication with other editors, of course, you should discuss any issues you have with other editors. Again, opening an account first will ease the discussion. --Muhandes (talk) 13:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

62.220.33.64 (talk)I'm awfully sorry, but I still have some problems with creating the account. Could you write there some people, besides Avraham and Mahmudmasri, which you have involved in our little discussion about this transliteration.


 * I linked the relevant information on how to open an account on your talk page, feel free to remove it if it's not needed. I'm not sure what else you are expecting of me. Who do you want me to write to, and what do you want me to write? --Muhandes (talk) 14:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

62.220.33.64 (talk)Well, may be you know some people which can make a full estimation and manage what to do with this transliteration system. Someone (or some people) should say that this system is possible to adopt or that this system is poor, but they must explain why. Of course, you need not do this, but maybe someone near you can help in this sphere.
 * I'm afraid I don't. I don't normally deal with transliterations at all, I only did in this case since it was done in an odd way. All I can do is repeat my suggestion, that you open discussion at WP:ARAB. --Muhandes (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   03:34, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! --Muhandes (talk) 16:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

...Baby One More Time
How can one edit the certification table? There seem to be some incorrect entries within what the the certification levels represent. For example, it states Belgium 3x Platinum but it has an incorrect 90,000 units posted in the sales/shipment column. Belgium's Platinum album certification-levels for international materials until 2006 was 50,000, (see page 23). Austria's Platinum level was also 50,000 until 2001, yet it states 20,000, see this. Poland's Platinum level for international releases until June 2002 was 100,000, yet it states 40,000. Can you tell me how to edit that table please. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The sources for these numbers were missing, thank you for them . I am going to fix the template tomorrow, but for now simply set  to whatever number is correct. See Certification Table Entry for other options, like setting a reference for the number itself.


 * May I ask how you know Belgium certificate threshold changed in 2006, and not, say in 2007? Same for all the other dates you gave, are there reliable sources for these dates? You can see the sources I used for each of the certifications in the table on Certification Table Entry too. --Muhandes (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, sometimes in 2006, the Belgium's levels for international releases were brought down from Platinum=50,000, Gold=25,000 to Platinum=30,000, Gold=15,000, IFPI's 2007 report which was released in the beginning of 2007 (see here) had the newer levels posted. I try to contact those certifying agencies which don't have their levels posted on their sites, to get heir previous levels, but so far only three have replied to my inquiries NVPI, IFPI (Sweden) and ZPAV. I see you have those official documents from NVPI and IFPI (Sweden) that I have received posted at the template. But for others including Austria, I still largely rely on my own research as IFPI (Austria) is not responsive. The levels for Austria were Platinum=50,000, Gold=25,000 until good 2001, see this ("Enya's Austrian Day"), they're presenting a Gold award in March 2001 for Enya's November 2000 album A Day Without Rain.--Harout72 (talk) 23:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For the Polish certification the source is great, but there is a contradiction between the source that says the current certification level is from June 2006 and ZPAV's website says it is from July 2005. As the latter is more public I assumed it is correct.
 * For the Belgian certification we know the current levels are at least from October 2007. The old levels were active at least until December 2005. We have a hole in the middle, and as the template aspires to rely on reliable sources only, the template will return zero for the interim period. For singles the situation is even worse, as there was another change somewhere before September 2010, the date of the current list, so the template will return zero for a longer period.
 * For Austrian certification the situation is a mess. We know the level was 25/50 until November 2000. We know it was changed to 15/30 somewhere between December 2000 and December 2005. As we don't know when I am going to return zero for the entire period. We know sometime between January 2006 and September 2007 is was changed to the current 10/20. Again, not knowing exactly the template will return zero. We know for sure the levels from October 2007 onward. --Muhandes (talk) 10:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * For Poland, I wonder why those dates are different, there are actually two periods that contradict with what the web site of ZPAV states. I think we should only use their e-mail for earlier levels, and the web site as you mentioned is more reliable for later periods.
 * For Belgium, the levels of the singles were kept at Platinum=50,000, Gold=25,000 until sometime 2008, see where IFPI 2007 report says below the singles table Belgium - figures in table indicate domestic repertoire singles; levels for international repertoire are Gold 25,000 and Platinum 50,000. But it seems they were brought down to Platinum=30,000, Gold=15,000 sometime in 2008, because IFPI's 2009 report released in the beginning of 2009, has the newer levels for singles, again for international levels see below the table. The singles levels for international releases have not been changed after that, again see below the table in 2010's report.
 * For Austria, while a guess, the German speaking countries including Germany, Switzerland, I'm assuming also Austria have changed their album levels three times. Austria possibly did reduce their levels to Platinum=40,000, Gold=20,000 at the same time as Switzerland, January 2001. But I'm guessing.--Harout72 (talk) 16:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Poland - Agree.
 * Belgium - I didn't have the 2009 source, it makes the situation better. The only unreferenced periods are for singles between November 2007 and December 2008 and for albums between January 2006 and September 2007.
 * Austria - Like you say, this is a guess. Until we have more, the template will return zero. When I have more time I'm planning on writing articles for the local IFPI chapters and document the certification history. I'm happy to see you are also interested. By the way, I raised some questions at Talk:List of music recording certifications. --Muhandes (talk) 18:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Lady Elliot Island Light
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Patricia Van Pelt Watkins
Hi, I left an explanation on the article talk page. Best regards Hekerui (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Japan's previous certification-levels
Hi Muhandes, I also have some information regarding Japan's previous certification levels. Between 1998-2003 (for sure), the levels for domestic recordings were: Platinum=400,000, Gold=200,000, for international materials the levels were: Platinum=200,000, Gold=100,000. Here are the sources 1, 2. I thought they should be applied to the template, in case we need to support levels of earlier recordings. Regards.--Harout72 (talk) 23:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * They are already implemented, following Recording Industry Association of Japan which uses a different source but reaches exactly the same conclusion. You might want to add your sources to that article, English sources should be preferred. --Muhandes (talk) 23:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ballard Bunder Gatehouse
Thanks for the review (and ALT1 suggestion). Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 05:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I wish other writers writing about Indian matters were as careful about their sources as you are. --Muhandes (talk) 08:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)