User talk:Northamerica1000/Archive 8

DYK for Dog surfing
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for the plastic pollution article

 * Thanks for the star! Northamerica1000(talk) 01:40, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

TAFI in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on Today's Articles For Improvement for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Moad Gouzrou
Greetings Northamerica1000, I see that you are the lister for the AfD on Moad Gouzrou. Would you please revisit this listing to check whether or not this is a second nomination for deletion. I was very confused by the history, and I may be mistaken. Thank you for your contributions in listing AfDs. Crtew (talk) 23:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Notice the spelling of the first name:
 * Articles for deletion/Mouad Gouzrou
 * Articles for deletion/Moad Gouzrou

Crtew (talk) 23:48, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Crtew: I've added the Articles for deletion/Mouad Gouzrou listing to the current Articles for deletion/Moad Gouzrou AfD discussion as a listing. It is virtually certain that the previous AfD is about the same subject. For example, in the former AfD, in the nomination it is stated "...youngest journalist in the Kingdom of Morrocco." Furthermore, the link in the former AfD to the (deleted) article is a redirect to Moad Gouzrou. However, I'm not an administrator, so I'm unable to access the previous article that was deleted. If you have any doubt, please ask an admin to compare the deleted article with the current one. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Crtew (talk) 04:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Certainly. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:40, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Northamerica1000, I need your help again with the above article. For some reason, it's not appearing under any of the three areas of discussion you listed, even though it did at one point. User:Wikifan115 removed a banner at one point. Could that have delisted it? Crtew (talk) 05:20, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Per the revision page for the AfD discussion (here), a user closed the AfD discussion on August 1, 2013, so the AnomieBOT removed the listings at the delete sort pages. Another user reverted the close, hence reopening the discussion, so the delete sorts had to be replaced manually. Thanks for letting me know about this matter; I've manually re-added the AfD discussion to the following delete sort pages:
 * WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors
 * WikiProject Deletion sorting/Africa
 * WikiProject Deletion sorting/News
 * – Northamerica1000(talk) 15:20, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Hello Margaretwmiller: A good place to inform people about this matter would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation. Northamerica1000(talk) 23:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deming Armory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Guard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ by another editor, diff. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:14, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Messaging
Thanks for all your help. Margaretwmiller (talk) 15:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No offense taken whatsoever. Just a note, if you work for an organization that edits Wikipedia articles on behalf of subjects, it is necessary at a very minimum to declare a conflict of interest on the article's talk page, per information at WP:COI. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:26, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Good to know. I will do that. We are a government-run, federally funded Presidential Library and Mr. Middleton was a federal employee working directly for the President of the United States for more than half his life...so I hope it is okay.Margaretwmiller (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the conflict of interest notice at Talk:Harry J. Middleton. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

New essay
Hi NA1000-- I wanted to ask if you might take a look at an essay I am working on and let me know what your thoughts are on it. I have a few questions/comments: Any other comments or thoughts would be appreciated, and you are welcome to make direct changes if you feel so inclined. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 04:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Is this essay redundant based on guidelines like WP:AGF and essays like WP:DIVA & Charitableness?
 * 2) Do the examples convey the idea well? I have a couple of alternatives I'm considering, but if you have ideas or experiences any based on the idea I am putting forth in the essay, let me know.
 * 3) While I firmly believe that this is an important concept that has guided my interactions on Wikipedia, and I think it is important to share it with others, I am unsure of what situations this essay might be appropriately used. I sort of get the feeling that this could come off as "holier than thou" when used in many discussions (e.g. akin to linking to WP:CIR in discussion with the non-competent editor).
 * 4) I really liked how David Foster Wallace illustrated this concept because he did it in a way that wasn't so much moral preaching and more, "if you allow yourself to think on your default setting, which is something I'm guilty of all the time (because it's hard), you'll be miserable." I don't think that comes across well in this essay and it's something I'd like to work on more before bringing out of my sandbox.
 * The essay meets the requirements of WP:GUIDES, section "Essays", so it's good to go for publishing in Project namespace. This essay topic doesn't particularly interest me, so I don't have much to add to the editorial. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm Dodger67. I noticed that you recently removed some content from User talk:Dodger67 without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello Dodger67: I didn't directly edit your talk page. I performed some test edits at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox, in preparation for my post at WP AFC located here: Proposal: Update the notice placed when declining submissions under "Verify" when using the The AFC Helper Script, and it appears that some script fu occurred in the process of performing my test edits at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox. Please respond at your convenience. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed your user name that was in place for whatever reason at the header of the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox page (diff). Northamerica1000(talk) 07:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. The causation: When I performed test edits using decline parameters using the The AFC Helper Script at the sandbox page, your talk page was automatically modified in attempts for The AFC Helper Script to contact you, since your user name was present in the template at the header of the page. Since I've removed your user name at the header of the page, you hopefully shouldn't experience this problem again. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back to me about this. I hope you're not next in line for a messed up Talk page now that you've been "logged" as the last editor of the AFC sandbox. I've used the script on the sandbox before for various tests and to my knowlege the script didn't disrupt anyone's talk page before now. BTW I've posted my 2c at the discussion. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:11, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. The script likely searched for elements within wikicode/html on your talk page, which caused the bizarre edits. This occurred because of your user name atop in the tag on the sandbox page, which has been removed. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sailen Debnath
Articles for deletion/Sailen Debnath is a BLP AfD but I failed o categorise it when I raised it and failed again recently. Any chance you could do this for me? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 00:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Categorized under: AfD debates (Biographical). This was done by adding in a "B" (for biography, chosen from a list here: Category:AfD debates) at the end of the template atop the discussion when opening the edit page, " ". Northamerica1000(talk) 04:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 10:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure thing; glad to be of assistance. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Transportation of animals
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:49, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 01:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Keep of Balochistan Rural Support Programme
Hi,

You recently closed this AfD, I suppose in part because I rescinded my nomination. I just noticed the following edits by the creator of the page (and prior to the AfD, sole editor):


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

etc etc.

The same appears to be happening with other AfDs where this user is the article creator. I have posted at ANI regarding this already.

I would appreciate any guidance you may have regarding this. I am not sure whether to reopen and scrutinize the sources offered more closely, or whether simply to stub out the article itself, assuming that the offered sources were in fact RS -- and that is the basic issue here, in my view, with all the articles of this user's that I have nominated for deletion.

thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have. I will watch your talk page, so feel free to respond either here, or on mine. -- [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ]# &#9604; 10:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My advice regarding this matter is exactly what you performed, take it to ANI. Per WP:CANVASS, the edits you provided above are problematic because the messages are not entirely neutral; they state that several sources have been found and that the topic is notable. Despite the fact that the user suggests to !vote either "keep" or "delete," it's apparent in stating the topic is notable that the person is attempting to request keep !votes. There could also possibly be issues regarding a selective, partisan audience being contacted, in attempts to votestack, but this would require more research to determine. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:44, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Oops
Sorry ... No idea how that happened. Bongo  matic  13:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You probably accidentally clicked on "undo" at some point somewhere. I've restored the information here (the thread directly above). Northamerica1000(talk) 14:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Picea pungens.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Picea pungens.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:07, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Stefan Kutschke
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Stefan Kutschke. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 79.216.34.185 (talk) 17:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joey Graceffa
Hello Northamerica1000. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joey Graceffa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: this has been edited in the last six monhs. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Transammonia
Hello! Your submission of Transammonia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:INDAFD
A discussion started at WT:INB few months ago, then recently it again started at User_talk:Moonriddengirl and as a result WP:INDAFD' was started. Here it was suggested to include it in the delsort templatre. But, I/we are facing trouble to find the WikiProject India delsort template. Can you help? -- Tito ☸ Dutta 13:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello User:Titodutta: Most delete sorts appear to use the same template, Deletion sorting, in which a category is then added: cat . Northamerica1000(talk) 16:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal descendants of John William Friso, Prince of Orange
How long do I have to wait before I can bring this back up for deletion discussion. I will give the only volunteer on fixing this a period of time, but I still want it deleted.--The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Check out the advice at Wikipedia's Deletion policy page, section WP:DELAFD under "Renominations," where it states in part "...users should allow a reasonable amount of time to pass before nominating the same page for deletion again, to give editors the time to improve the page." Northamerica1000(talk) 21:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks so much, I appreciate it! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 22:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

STiki emergency

 * ✅ New version downloaded, old version dumped. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

EPlasty
If AFD is not a vote and closures should be based on arguments, not vote counts, and you think that "Both sides of the debate here have valid points", then why is this a "keep" and not a "no consensus"? I can see why you don't go for "delete" (although that would be the policy-based thing to do), but if you really think there are good and valid arguments both ways, then I don't see how this could be anything else than "no consensus". Thanks, BTW, for you hard work at delsort. --Randykitty (talk) 21:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, !votes are not votes, and the merits of the arguments are key. As stated in the close, arguments on both sides had valid points (and were quite logical), but in this instance arguments to retain the article are outweighing those to delete it in relation to WP:NJOURNALS. Hence the keep result instead of no consensus. I've addended the AfD close to reflect this. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Very surprising. Nonetheless, thanks for clarifying this. --Randykitty (talk) 15:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Chicken curry
This is a non-veg food, if you are a vegetarian, replace the code above with any other dish from WP:KITCHEN Tito ☸ Dutta 07:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice looking plate; curry spicy! Northamerica1000(talk) 14:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

AFDs
Hi Northamerica, it looks like I happened to notice the AFDs for those bands (Sweethearts; Powerhouse) at the same time as you... I didn't mean to step on your toes, lol. :) Keep up the good work - Cheers!  Gong   show  04:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello User:Gongshow: Likewise, to you; we had the same idea at about the same time. It's nice that people are keeping up with deletion sorting, though! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 04:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you and Gene93k in particular really stay on top of the delsorting and it's often quite helpful for me, so I try to help out when I can. Thanks again.  Gong   show  04:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Any and all assistance is greatly appreciated, and thanks! Northamerica1000(talk) 04:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

References for Wikipedia page
Hello Northamerica1000, I tried re-editing the Wikipedia page for Chulo Magazine, but according to your notes, I needed to add a reference. To which part are you referring to, so I will know what to obtain a reference for? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguelpedroza (talk • contribs) 20:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello: I've added a references section to the submission at Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Chulo Magazine. The easiest way to get started is to list reliable sources that provide significant coverage about the topic there. For more information, see Help:Referencing for beginners and also check out the WikiProject Magazines Writing guide. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(Comment)

 * Thanks for the star, and for contributing to the encyclopedia. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Help!!
Thank you Northamerica1000 for yesterday's help. It looks like I need more help. I tried to create another short article on my sandbox like I did the first time except that it kept adding to my yesterday's article when I created a new section. After a couple tries, I realized and did undo. On my log, on yesterday's article, it now says "talk page blacking" and I have no clue what that means. I am hoping I didn't do anything detrimental. So I created the new article using wizard, and it is in for review, but says it could take 3 weeks or longer. :( I guess I could really use some guidance as to what I did and what I should have done or what's going on in my sandbox and etc.  I feel like I am in way over my head. Please help!!  Techyon (talk) 04:39, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blanked the redirect that was on your sandbox page at User:Techyon/sandbox. Your sandbox is good to go for future use. When Articles for creation (AfC) entries are moved, a courtesy redirect is automatically added to sandbox pages. In the future, consider just watchlisting or otherwise denoting the page the redirect goes to, and then remove the redirect from the sandbox page. I'll review your AfC submission, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/GroundWork, Inc. shortly. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This may take some time (see below). Northamerica1000(talk) 04:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Question for administrator
Upon a source review, the topic Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/GroundWork, Inc. meets WP:CORPDEPTH. However, when attempting to accept the AfC submission, it is blocked from occurring, with the message "The destination article has been protected from creation." Therefore, requesting admin help to publish this submission in main namespace. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!
I really appreciate your help. Techyon (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, as per the above, this may take some time to be addressed. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:12, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Tread carefully. The AFC draft is all but identical to the (G5) deleted version created by User:Archana3011 (a sock of banned user Morning277). Right now I don't have time to investigate further, but I'd be interested to know how Techyon managed to precisely duplicate the text of the deleted page, including the sources. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  06:46, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, given that Techyon's only other contributed article, WillowTree Apps, was also previously created by a Morning277 sock, I think it's safe to assume that there's a bit of sockage going on here as well. I'm blocking Techyon and deleting the two pages concerned. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  06:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Stanley Fish
There is some disagreement on the Stanley Fish page regarding how to describe his father's profession. Your opinion would be appreciated.Macroscope7 (talk) 21:06, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My only edit was to add a tag to the article (diff page). Upon review, the BLP unsourced tag was added in error, because one source was present. Sorry for the error. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 21:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

AfD classification
Hello,

Thanks for the work you do in classifying AfD's. Would you add the Robotic clusters AfD to the "Computing" topic? It's a straight CS paper, and it might pick up a bit more discussion from folks who watch that category.

Thanks,

Lesser Cartographies (talk) 16:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It has been ✅. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I appreciate it. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 17:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

First relisting
Can you please check/verify my first relisting here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent Energy? My reason of relisting was: consensus not clear, 2 delete votes, 3 keep votes, and weak keep vote arguments (like nominator has not contributed to the article).
 * How to add comment to relist if I am using the script?
 * Does "7 days" mean after 7 days or I can relist on the seventh day too? -- Tito ☸ Dutta 16:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello User:Titodutta: Upon a review of various AfD relistings, it appears that people sometimes relist on day 7, rather than after a full 7 days have passed, but generally within a few hours or so prior to the passing of the seventh day. This is understandable, since various users are in various time zones. Per WP:RELIST, it states, "... if at the end of the initial seven-day period...", so technically people may be relisting slightly early per the timestamps. For example, Articles for deletion/Intelligent Energy commenced on 21:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC), and was relisted on 16:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC). The seventh day technically concludes on 21:16, 27 August 2013, so (again, technically), this was relisted around 5 hours early. I haven't used the User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD script, so your questions regarding this are better-directed elsewhere; perhaps its talk page. Your relisting of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent Energy is fine in my opinion in this case. Hope this helps to clarify matters! Northamerica1000(talk) 17:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps to clarify matters!
 * Definitely -- Tito ☸ Dutta 17:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Great! Northamerica1000(talk) 17:18, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Food portals
Instead of having multiple templates for this and food portals 1, modify fp1 and transclude it to fp. Saves work and time. Why have two, when you can have one. It saves work. Laziness is my friend, and can be yours too...--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:15, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand, but for now I'd prefer to keep the new template existent as-is, as I have plans for more work on it in time. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Newsletter
on starting this up again!

Here is a present for you:

This should make it easier to create them.--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice header, and thanks. It's still in the draft phase, but coming along. Hoping to revitalize interest and participation in the project. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Closure of Articles for deletion/David Bennett Cohen
Since you closed it with the comments that it be kept until merged, surely the usual closure is to close as a "Merge"? Would you mind revisiting your closure and considering altering your conclusion? Fiddle  Faddle  08:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello User:Timtrent: The close was (in summary), "Overall consensus after two relistings is for article retention, including the possibility of a merge..." rather than outright merge. The arguments and considerations of the two keep !voters were also taken into consideration in this close. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:25, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I know. That is what I was asking you to reconsider. Fiddle   Faddle  08:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * (ping) User:Timtrent: It's rather evenly split between keep and merge in this case, and both sides have valid arguments. In order for a merge to occur, the article requires retention. The delete !vote there states in part, "Delete unless WP:RS can be found", which were found and added to the article, and the nominator changed their initial delete nomination to "Merge and redirect." The "Probably redirect to Country Joe and the Fish if that's his best-known musical role." doesn't take sources that were found later and added to the article into consideration. The "Retain article" !vote based upon citations on album liners is not particularly policy-based, so this aspect of it carries less weight, but mentions other bands that the subject has been involved and the subject's work as a sideman, ultimately recommending retention versus a merge. Ultimately, I feel that the close is the most accurate per the discussion and arguments in the debate. Closing as merge would discount the arguments of the keep !voters and the sources presented to an unacceptable degree in this case. Perhaps consider initiating a merge discussion for this article. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:38, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair Fiddle   Faddle  09:02, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Transammonia
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:17, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Garmsir incident
Why didn't you Relist as a normal course to gain consensus? LibStar (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * In this instance, all of the arguments were policy-based to an acceptable degree. Per WP:RELIST, it states, " relisting should not be a substitute for a "no consensus" closure. If the closer feels there has been substantive debate, disparate opinions supported by policy have been expressed, and consensus has not been achieved, a no-consensus close may be preferable." It also states there, "Relisting debates repeatedly in the hope of getting sufficient participation is not recommended..." In this case, relisting wasn't the most appropriate route to take. Northamerica1000(talk) 20:19, 31 August 2013 (UTC)