User talk:Omni Flames/Archive 13

MLK Jr. moves
Thanks for the close and the moves. It look like you neglected to move the main one though: Martin Luther King, Jr.. Dicklyon (talk) 02:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries. The main is the only one I didn't move, because it's move-protected. I've filed a request at WP:RM/TR so hopefully an admin will get to it.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 03:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. Dicklyon (talk) 03:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rolfing
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rolfing. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

No subject
About CryptoCarbon: CryptoCarbon is a new CryptoCurrency which will be launching in August 2016. The company name is called BEEONE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harigovindvasudevannamboodiri (talk • contribs) 11:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please take a good look at WP:V. All information on Wikipedia must be verified by reliable sources. If there's no independent sources which talk about the currency yet, then it's nowhere near notable enough for an article.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 11:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Removal of CSD tags
What exactly was your reasoning for removing the CSD tag from Just a Tourist? Please read over WP:NOTADVERTISING. &mdash; Music1201  talk  01:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's been deleted now, but I still disagree that it met the CSD criteria. There was a credible claim of significance in the article. I seem to remember that the article stated that the subject had won an award. That's credible, and that's significant. As for G11, I agree there was a slight promotional tone, but I tried to remove the advertising, and then remove the tag. I'm well aware of WP:NOTADVERTISING, thank you very much. It was a poor article, no arguments there. However, speedy deletion isn't appropriate for all articles. This one didn't meet the criteria in my opinion, and I think a PROD would've been more appropriate.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 05:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Rejection of my article on the Gherla Holocaust Memorial Monument
Dear Omni Flames,

Please explain the items for which my article was rejected again. I got feedback about 4 weeks ago and I complied with all the requirements outlines. I really do not understand what is the issue. This monument was cited in many newspapers. it is on the main page of a United States Governmental Organization and Wikipedia even has many other entries for Holocaust Memorial Monuments throughout the world. This is my first article for Wikipedia but I am ready to give up as the approval process seems to be very cumbersome and it takes so long. Thanks for your help and feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.232.232 (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC) Micuklein (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Omnibot image


How is the image for not of an actual Omnibot! Please correct this serious oversight with haste. On the other hand, you do win the award for best-named bot on the project. ~ Rob 13 Talk 01:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Wait, an Omnibot is actually a thing!? Well now you've made me really want one.... I guess I'll just have to place that image on the bot's user page to make me feel better about not having one ;).  Omni Flames ( talk ) 02:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bombardier Movia & CNR Changchun C951
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bombardier Movia & CNR Changchun C951. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
Actually I guy told me to use AFC script and I did it, it told me to add my name and I did it, however I just noted the guidelines right now. Sorry and thanks. VarunFEB2003 (talk) 10:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries, feel free to add your name back when you meet the guidelines.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 10:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure. Thanks. VarunFEB2003 (talk) 10:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: "a number of the references, such as IP switch, don't appear to be reliable. "
I appreciate your rapid review of the page I updated and submitted.

I'm not sure you're reading the reference to Ipswitch, Inc correctly. This is not IP Switch, this is a company located in Lexington, MA that has made several presentations to the Boston Network Users Group over the years. Could you explain what you mean by "don't appear to be reliable"? Did you visit the company's website, ipswitch.com? I'm not sure why you could consider this not to be reliable. Many people confuse the name Ipswitch with an IP switch but that is far from the truth here.

Also you said "a number of the references". It will be helpful to me for you to tell me which ones don't appear to be reliable so I know where to make corrections and improvements.

I deeply respect Wikipedia and their insistence for valid and verifiable entries and I want to do what is necessary to improve what I have written to conform. Thank you. -steve — Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenInMA (talk • contribs) 13:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gruffudd
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gruffudd. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Closure of RM at Template talk:Catholic Church
This seems like a rather unnecessarily strict standard of consensus. There's no minimum participation required, and it was three supporters vs. one slight opposer. How is that not consensus to move? And how is "avoid confusion" (cited 3 times, assuming that's what CookieMonster meant to say) not a good argument? juju ( hajime!  &#124;  waza ) 10:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but two of the supporters (not yourself) had a very poor reason, or none at all, for doing so. Also, I closed it with no prejudice against speedy renomination. That means that you can restart the discussion right now, and notify those who participated in the previous discussion.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 10:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The other two were for the same exact reason: avoid confusion. CookieMonster expressed that as "per nom", and Chicbyaccident expressed it by changing their vote when I pointed out they themselves had been confused. They don't need new reasons beyond those in the nom; such a supermajority of agreement is good enough, especially when only needing to overcome a slight oppose with a rationale of "eh it seems okay already" without much of an argument against the nominated name. I could restart the discussion, but that's really just an unnecessary step when there's already a consensus, and when this has already been on the table so long. juju  ( hajime!  &#124;  waza ) 10:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have changed my close to "moved" since you make a good point. Thanks for bringing this up.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 10:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for being receptive and willing to discuss.  juju  ( hajime!  &#124;  waza ) 10:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you're still in the RM-closing mood, this one's fairly old and could use a look. juju ( hajime!  &#124;  waza ) 10:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/London Buses route 53
Hi, you previously contributed to a deletion discussion for London bus route 390, another similar deletion discussion is ongoing at Articles for deletion/London Buses route 53 which you may wish to give your input on.

Note: I've placed (or am in the process of placing) this notification on the talk page of anyone who took part in the original deletion discussion, as the most recent similar discussion, regardless of deletion preference, which is allowable under WP:CANVASS. The only exception being if that person has already contributed, or has indicated on their profile that they are inactive.

Thanks for your time. Jeni ( talk ) 10:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Sam Sailor Talk! 07:02, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have responded.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 07:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

No subject
Hi,

I would like to become an admin for the page of mma fighter 'Luke Rockhold'. I have been editing his page for sometime now. How can I become an admin and can I be please be nominated for the same.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7leumas (talk • contribs) 17:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey ! Adminship is generally for experienced users. With only 108 edits under your belt at the time of writing, it's highly unlikely you'll pass a RFA anytime soon. You might want to read WP:ADMIN and WP:RFAADVICE. Good luck out there!  Omni Flames ( talk ) 07:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Thoughts
Can you hurry up and get a year under your belt? You're pretty much admin material already apart from your account age, which isn't a massive issue in my mind... -- samtar talk or stalk 07:42, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, thank you for the kind words, I appreciate it. I would like to be an admin someday, but as you mentioned, I haven't been here all that long yet. With current RFA standards, it's unlikely I'll pass anytime within the next 6 months or so, which is why I'm trying not to think about adminship at the moment, and just focusing on normal editing. Anyway, when I do think I'm ready, you'll definitely be the first person I go to ;).
 * By the way, I'm on IRC at the moment if you want to talk.  Omni Flames ( talk ) 07:54, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, and forgetting about it and focussing on what you enjoy is the way to go :) other than that, just continue being here for another six months and don't get mentioned on WP:ANI! -- samtar talk or stalk 08:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That's generally a good plan, yep :).  Omni Flames ( talk ) 08:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Shiela Marie Pineda
Hi, you recently reverted this edit to Shiela Marie Pineda as vandalism, but I don't think it was. The nickname that the IP removed isn't mentioned in either of the article's sources, but the name in the edit summary does appear, in the Manila Times article. I can certainly see how a name like "Bang" would look suspicious, though. Arbor Fici (talk) 11:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Your Message
Hello Sir/ Mam, We have received your message reagrding uder id, kindly guide as we are new to Wikipedia. Thanks.

Brahmakumaris Media & Public Relations Services — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brahmakumaris Media & Public Relations Services (talk • contribs) 08:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Bots/Requests for approval/OmniBot 5
Task#5 has been approved. — xaosflux  Talk 19:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Coming Through the Rye
Hello, I want to let you know that I created an article titled Coming Through the Rye (film). Therefore, you may decline my draft of Draft:Coming Through the Rye (2015 film). Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 21:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅  Omni Flames ( talk ) 22:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/CXT
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/CXT. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:39, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 1 August 2016 (UTC)