User talk:Premeditated Chaos/Archive 8

Ayyappanpillai Ajayaghosh
Hi friend, You had put a tag for considering the article, Ayyappanpillai Ajayaghosh for deletion with a suggestion to improve the article to save it. Felt the subject of the article is notable enough with his list of honors, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize, TWAS Prize, Infosys Prize and host of elected fellowships of major science academies. I have since tried my little mite to develop the article and the tag has been removed. Trust it is in order. --jojo@nthony (talk) 08:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Alexander Raikov
Absolutely I don't understand why you deleted article Alexander Raikov

all the requirements were met. Please consider the possibility of recovery. Packtrif (talk) 18:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * A bunch of articles that the guy himself wrote are not reliable sources. Didn't look notable to me. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Excuse me dear, but what for you is not look notable, cannot be considered as the ultimate truth, because there are a lot of other points of view, so why You take on such a responsibility to be a judge? Still, I'm trying to supplement Wikipedia with reliable information and have my first steps in this direction, if I made some mistakes, please explain to me, but not delete my work Packtrif (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't call me dear; that's condescending. I deleted the page because there was an expired request for deletion and I believed the article didn't demonstrate notability. If you don't agree, by all means take it to Requests for undeletion, I don't have any issue with my decision being reviewed by someone else. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for my English, I didn't mean to offend you, Google translate -dear in the wrong context:) But I'm really sorry for my teacher and my work, what do you mean: the article don't demonstrate notability, I realy want to make it good, help me please Packtrif (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * No worries, it happens with Google translate :) Wikipedia requires that the subjects of articles be notable by Wikipedia standards. Generally, that means there needs to be coverage on the person from a reliable, unbiased, third-party source. That link goes into more detail, but that's the bare minimum of what is needed. All of the sources you included are papers or publications written by Alexander Raikov. Someone's own publications can't be used to demonstrate their own notability. What you would need to demonstrate notability is an article or a book (preferably more than one) that 'someone else' wrote about Alexander Raikov. So, for example, a magazine article about him from an important magazine, or a chapter about him in a book about his field of expertise. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Soon I will try to amend the article such links.Packtrif (talk) 20:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I've stuck the whole thing into your userspace at User:Packtrif/Alexander Raikov. You can edit it freely there without worrying about it getting deleted again. If you want, you can drop me a line once you've found some references and I can see if they would meet the notability guidelines? Also, Peer review might be helpful in generating unbiased feedback about the article. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding, good luck.Packtrif (talk) 05:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

AMA
I am contesting the speedy deletion of the African Muslims Agency which you recently deleted. Please restore and seek other methods of deletion discussion. I feel that the article can easily be improved if necessary.--TM 10:35, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to move it into your userspace as a draft (to be moved back when complete), but I don't feel comfortable putting it back into mainspace in the state it's currently in. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 11:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am contesting the deletion, so it should go through proper deletion channels. If I had contested the deletion prior to your deleting it, it would still be in the mainspace. A quick review of google books shows it as one of the top Muslim aid agencies in the world by independent sources. Please just restore it.--TM 13:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If I restore it to mainspace in its current state, someone else is going to wind up tagging for speedy deletion again, and we'll be right back at square one. If I move it to userspace, you can update and reference it to your heart's content without worrying if it's going to get speedy deleted or PROD'd, or AFD'd while you're working on it. Then once it's improved as you state is possible, it goes back into mainspace in a state that makes it much less likely to go straight back onto the chopping block again. I don't think that's unreasonable. You could also ask at Requests for undeletion. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:35, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please userfy it if you are unwilling to restore it to the mainspace.--TM 16:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done, sorry about the delay, I wasn't on today until now. It's at User:Namiba/Africa Muslims Agency. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Quota
You deleted quota: with the comment:
 * (change visibility) 02:29, 21 January 2017 Premeditated Chaos (talk | contribs | block) deleted page Quota (A5: Article that has already been transwikied to another project) (view/restore)

Yet on the talk page I had written:

>== Contested deletion ==

This page should not be speedily deleted because of three reasons why this fails speedy deletion: --PBS (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wiktionary or Wikisource)." It has not been transwikified (see wiktionary:quota history).
 * 2) It is sourced from an Encyclopaedia so is by definition an encyclopaedic topic in the views of the editors of EB1911 (a reliable source)
 * 3) It is possible for it to be expanded into a larger article, so just a dictionary definition is restrictive

What is the evidence that "Article that has already been transwikied to another project"? -- PBS (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The exact text of the article wasn't copied over, but it's pretty clear from scanning the entry on Wiktionary that the bulk of the content is already on Wiktionary. If you want to expand it, I'm happy to move it into your userspace so you can expand it there before moving it back into mainspace. But the article as it stood was basically just a dictionary definition of the concept but in 1911-style English, so I'm standing by the deletion. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Not only was the article not copied over but it was not transwikified. Just because there is text that you think covers it does not make it so. So your reason for deletion is void. Stubs do not need to be placed in userspace to be expanded. It can be done from a stub in main space. So that is void reason as well. Now it may be that there is a consensus to delete it but the reasons for speedy deletion arafe not present. writing " so I'm standing by the deletion." is a justification for speedy deletion, rather than an AFD. -- PBS (talk) 13:37, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, I just went nosing around and there's already a quota (disambiguation) page that contains the exact same information that the quota stub did, just in modern English and with extra disambiguation. So now I really don't understand the need to have a separate page for quota just on its own. If anything, the disambig page should be at quota, not at a separate disambig page. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am surprised that you did not look at the history of the article (or the content of the talk page?) before you deleted it. If you had then you would have known that I had moved the dab page to quota (disambiguation) to make way for the article. It does not seem that you spent much time reviewing the evidence and considering whether the page should be deleted or not. The dab page does not contain the exact information that the article did, see for example:
 * this edit
 * and also this edit which was made after your comment above.
 * The dab page did not and could not contain the same information as the page I created (a seed page from 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Quota). The point being that the sentence "The word first appears in connexion with the levying of men, money or supplies for military and naval purposes from districts, towns or seaports, and thus is equivalent to "contingent" (...), used since the 18th century specifically of a contribution of men or ships according to a scale fixed between the contracting parties." -- because that is the stub for an encyclopaedic article: Who first used it, why did they use it (probably an act of parliament), why was it necessary? etc.
 * If you are going to delete a page then the very least you can do is look through the history of the page and discuss with the person who created it the reasons for its existence. However to get back to the discussion of your deletion. What is the evidence that "Article that has already been transwikied to another project"? If there was no evidence that it was, and there is not, you can not legitimately use "A5: Article that has already been transwikied to another project" for a speedy deletion. -- PBS (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

At this point, it looks like someone else has moved the disambig page back to the main page, so this discussion is basically moot. I still stand by my original deletion, but I'm done with the page now. If you have a problem with the move and the subsequent trimming they appear to have done, please take it up with that editor. Although for the record I agree with their move. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Delete redirects?
Thanks for the A7/G8 delete - could you also remove the trail of redirects to that page Special:WhatLinksHere/Eylem_Kızıl, or does that happen automatically? --Cybela (talk) 08:37, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll do it, thanks for the heads up. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Dayan Lake and Draft:Jiangshe (姜畲镇)
Hi,

You had deleted them. Mind if I ask for them back? I would like to work on them now Uptoniga (talk) 15:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done and done, and I've removed the speedy delete tags. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

David and Mr. Greyling
Despite your warning to User:TeeganKeegan the hoax article  was recreated. Speedied and salted after AFD. Meters (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Damn I was keeping an eye on it, but it looks like the third time was after I went to bed. And here I was really hoping I'd gotten through to him. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Clearly no loss to us after that last tantrum. Meters (talk) 17:39, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * My favorite part was the unblock request coming moments after he vandalized my user talk. What a gift. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Mine was "People keep blocking me for no reason." Meters (talk) 08:49, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Derrick Simmons page
I noticed that you have deleted Derrick Simmons page because the person is not remarkable. With over 200 Hollywood movies and TV shows to his credit and being active in industry for more than 5 years, Derrick Simmons is an award winning actor and director. I have also provided a lot of references from news articles and cited secondary sources which confirm the facts presented. The page can be improved further if you insist but please try to undelete it. Ashishchopra778 (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Dude fails actor notability requirements. Also, you're a paid account sockpuppeteer, per this investigation. I'm not undeleting. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:55, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Major League Roller Hockey Europe
This was deleted in a previously unnoticed campaign to obliterate this sport. Please restore to my sandbox. Trackinfo (talk) 19:58, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Dropped it at User:Trackinfo/Major League Roller Hockey Europe. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * add Federation of African Roller Sports and any others you deleted on the general subject of Inline Hockey. As I find them I'll be requesting them anyhow. Trackinfo (talk) 03:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to userfy anything you find, but I'm not going through the deletion log for you. User:Trackinfo/Federation of African Roller Sports is done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Institut d'Estudis Occitans
Hello, I've just found out (through red links) that the Institut d'Estudis Occitans page has been deleted. I got no previous alert, nor link to a discussion page about deletion. This is quite an old organization (est. 1945) serving as a publisher too (ISBN prefix 978-2-85910 for recent publications, many reviews) that was also studied by many scholars (eg Henri Jeanjean, based in Australia: http://ro.uow.edu.au/artspapers/1882/ and others). Is it possible to access the discussion about the deletion? Thanks in advance, — J. F. B. (me´n parlar) 12:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Taking a quick peek at your User page, it looks like you usually use Occitan Wiki, which may not have some of the same processes or requirements we do here on ENwiki. (If you are familiar with ENwiki policy, please accept my apologies in advance for any explanations that seem patronizing). There effectively was no deletion discussion in the sense of the articles for deletion process. The page was deleted through proposed deletion (or PROD), which is basically a process where (and I'm paraphrasing here) someone tags a page to propose it should be deleted, and if the notice remains without being removed for seven days, the page is then eligible for deletion. This is what happened to the IEO page, with the reasoning being given by User:Moaz786 as follows "Very few reliable third-party sources that talk about the subject in detail; not notable." My choice to delete the page was procedural only; I have no strong feelings one way or another.
 * Now, because PROD essentially serves as a shortcut for deletion, there are also shortcuts to having the article un-deleted. I am very happy to "userfy" the article for you - I will restore the page, then move it to your User space for you to work on before restoring it to the main space. I usually do this because I feel that restoring a page in the same condition that it was deleted in often results in someone immediately putting it up for AFD. Which sort of defeats the point. If you're not satisfied with that, you can ask at requests for undeletion, and they can also help you.
 * If you do intend to restore the article, the most important thing to do to prevent further deletion attempts would be to find more reliable sources to cite in the article, as that was the PROD tagger's main concern. You might also want to talk to him to see what kind of sources he checked for - it's definitely possible that he missed some, or dismissed some that should be included.
 * I hope this long-winded reply is helpful to you. Let me know if you need anything else. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for this detailed reply. I'll probably rewrite the article with properly cited sources and references, but not in a short time as I'm quite busy. Best regards. — J. F. B. (me´n parlar) 11:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've restored the page to your userspace at User:Jfblanc/Institut d'Estudis Occitans so you can see what was already there and fix it up in your own time. Cheers! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

OmarGoshTV
Premeditated Chaos (one of the great user names, btw), I see from Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/OmarGoshTV that this article was hijacked during the AfD, so most of the arguments made there applied to a different subject. is discussing what should happen now, but I thought you should be notified as closing admin. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:41, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks on both counts :) I left a message at the creator's talk page, which is where the majority of the discussion seems to be at. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, the hijacker's talk page... Drmies (talk) 03:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Whoops yeah that's the thing I meant. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Brandon Aubrey
Hi PMC! I saw that you deleted Brandon Aubrey. I completely understand why it was deleted. However, is it possible for you to move it's contents to User:Jith12/Brandon Aubrey so that I can re-create it when he gets a fully professional cap and is therefore notable as per WP:GNG and WP:NSOCCER? Thanks, Jith12 (talk) 21:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done and done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! (P.S. I love your username!) Jith12 (talk) 01:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, and also thanks :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:24, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for undeletion of Draft:Telecoming
I was browsing over MfD just now when I noticed that a draft in an unclosed discussion that had garnered a keep !vote and nothing else had been deleted. Upon looking at the logs, I found that you had speedy deleted it some three days after the keep !vote, probably not noticing the in-progress MfD discussion. Now, I never saw the content of the draft, but speedy deletion is supposed to be uncontested by uninvolved editors. This is why any editor besides the page creator can remove a speedy deletion tag. Because of this, I think that 's keep !vote, made well before your speedy deletion, renders the deletion inappropriate. I am requesting that you restore the article so that the MfD discussion that was already in progress can be completed properly. Thanks! A2soup (talk) 05:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Totally my bad. Looking at the history, it seems like it was heavily promotional in tone initially (probably why it was declined at AfC), and has since been stripped down. It...also...seems to have been tagged for db-spam by the original author, which is...bizarre. Anyway, it's back now and I've stuck a correct MfD template on it. I did leave a comment on the discussion explaining the stripping of the promotional material. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Your sig
I noticed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Telecoming that your sig links misleadingly to an account which has not been used since 2006. Cabayi (talk) 09:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * If you click on the link, it redirects you to my main. It's just shorter, is all. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do I need to click on every link to find out what it really means? What if I hover? Tools/Navigation popups tells me that you're PMC (redirecting to Premeditated Chaos) with no extra privileges, only 5 edits, and who hasn't edited since 2006. When I see your edits on talk pages discussing that you've deleted/restored pages - it doesn't tie up - it looks like a BS claim that I then need to look into.
 * If I just look, the highlighter script doesn't show you as an admin. It also defeats the "previously visited link" highlighting in my browser. It also prevents the wiki software identifying that (talk) is HERE, unlike (talk).
 * It may be your intent to just be shorter, but that's not the effect. And
 * &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) → &spades;PMC&spades; (talk)
 * appears just as short as
 * &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) → &spades;PMC&spades; (talk)
 * and has the virtue of displaying correctly. Cabayi (talk) 12:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Duly noted. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 08:53, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Terhi Kokkonen (athlete)
Another one snuck up on me. I should never announce I'm busy. Please restore to my sandbox. Trackinfo (talk) 07:12, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Userfy
Hey, I spotted that you deleted an article and was wondering if you could userfy it into my userspace so I can assess if we can salvage it -- I think it might have been one we could have saved, but I didn't notice the prod tag at the time: British Hunter. Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:10, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Reformatting datestamps
Hi, please do not reformat valid datestamps to an invalid form, as you did. Bots and scripts expect the timestamp to be in the same format as is produced by four or five tildes: leading zero for hours earlier than 10, no am/pm indicator, no day of the week, no elapsed time, timezone (if present) should be "(UTC)" alone, without offset.

I suspect that you might have the "" gadget enabled at, this is known to cause such problems. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 01:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, that was pretty clearly caused by the unblock-declined template and not by an intentional effort to reformat the date and cause "damage", but I appreciate you going out of your way to advise me of the situation. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I take it you mean the template? That does not reformat timestamps, it outputs exactly what you typed in. I expect that you saw the  template, expanded the "Administrator use only:" block, and copied to your clipboard the bit that is preceded by "If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code" - the problem is that what is displayed there should be a verbatim copy of the unblock request, but if you have "" enabled, any datestamps in that text will become mangled. So when you edited the section, deleted what was there and pasted in your clipboard text, what you pasted in was already misformatted. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yup, what I said. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello
I would like to retrieve the data of this page:East Meets Westlife Tour for backup.

08:35, 24 January 2017 Premeditated Chaos (talk | contribs) deleted page East Meets Westlife Tour (A7: Article about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

Thank you.

Yhanphan (talk) 07:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have moved the page to User:Yhanphan/East Meets Westlife Tour. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 11:25, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Life-Link Friendship Schools
Hi! I would like to discuss the deletion of Life-Link Friendship schools page on Wikipedia (Articles for deletion/Life-Link Friendship Schools). I am a new user of Wikipedia and don't know all the detailed rules that have to be considered when updating/creating a Wikipedia page. However, Life-Link Friendship Schools is an existing organisation based in Sweden at Sigtunaskolan Humanistiska Läroverket. Also a link to the website was provided in the article: http://lifelinkschools.org/. I agree that a "join" link in the text was not such a good idea, but I was not aware that this is forbidden, apologies for that. If the promoting part is deleted from the article, would it be sufficient to put it back online?

Besides we are not related with Life-Link Ghana, they are imitating our concept and probably made for fraud.

(Hvthiene (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC))
 * Wikipedia has a higher threshold for retaining articles than simply confirming that a thing exists. We require the subjects of our articles to be notable, meaning they have "gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time". We verify this notability by checking to see that enough sources have discussed the topic in-depth. We require these sources to be reliable (that is, known to be truthful and accurate), in-depth (that is, not simply a mention of a name), and independent (that is, not produced, influenced, or owned by someone involved with the topic of the article). If we can't find enough reliable sources to confirm that a topic is notable per our policies, it usually gets deleted. In this case, per the discussion in the deletion debate, we couldn't find enough of those sources, so we deleted the article after the debate period ended.


 * Even with the promotional material removed from the article, the subject doesn't meet our threshold of notability at this time. If you were able to provide some sources (again, keeping in mind reliable, in-depth, and independent) that might show notability, the issue could be revisited at deletion review. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the explanation. I have some sources from UNESCO, Anna Lindh foundation, Marcus Nilsson (who wrote about the influence of an action in Jordan) and Masumi Ikeda. If I search a bit more in local newspapers where most of our partner schools are active. I am sure I will find even more sources, although it will not be in English probably. Is this a good start to ask for a revisitation at deletion review? (Hvthiene (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC))


 * Those are a great start, absolutely. Sources not in English are totally fine, although it does help if you can summarize the content since it's possible the deletion review people won't speak the language they are in. Let me know how things go at deletion review. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hej again, I asked for a deletion review here. They did not reached a consensus, which implies the original descision stands. I don't understand everything. For exemple: Userfy on request. I don't see the OP questioning the XfD, and I see no discussion with the closing admin; and while the XfD raises questions, those questions need not be answered.  Unscintillating (talk) 17:11, 13 February 2017 (UTC). I had a discussion with the closing admin? You are the closing admin?  Hvthiene (talk) 08:17, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure what happened, it seems like that person missed the discussion we had here. You could have mentioned that at the DR, I think? Even if you discount that one guy's opinion though, the summary by User:RoySmith pretty clearly indicates that they didn't reach a consensus to undelete after their review. However, I'm sure you noticed RoySmith's next comment, which was a recommendation to create a draft version of the article yourself and submit it for review atarticles for creation. Sometimes it's just better to start fresh; this may be one of those situations, given the comments at the deletion review about the history of advertising in the article. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the help! I will start to make a new draft about Life-Link Friendship Schools. Hvthiene (talk) 08:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

BUNAC
Hi Premeditated C, I'd like the text of the BUNAC entry for backup.
 * I've moved it to User:Burgundywine/BUNAC. In future, please remember to sign all comments with four tildes, like so: ~, so we know who made what comments and when. And also (no big, but), most people prefer new sections at the bottom of their Talk page :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:21, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Some Swedish politician PRODs
Hi Premeditated Chaos, just as a FYI, I deprodded some articles about Swedish mid-20th century politicians that you had prodded a couple of days ago. (Maybe you already noticed this, it just occurred to me now that the civil thing to do would be to let you know). When you prodded the articles they did not make any particular claim to notability, so it was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The people in question were all members of Parliament back in the day however, so I added that info, with references. I see that there's also a few other similar stubs about Swedish MPs where only their party membership is mentioned, and I'll try to get round to those this weekend. Thanks for bringing these up! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, no problem. I don't actually have it in for Swedish mid-20th century politicians in particular, I swear, so don't worry about me hunting those down :) What I do have is a masochistic desire to clear out the 18,605 orphaned articles from Feb 2009 backlog. I run into a lot of dubiously notable stuff while I'm in there, so I tend to PROD-tag a lot of random things. Sometimes they get deleted, sometimes they get tidied and ref'd, either way I'm happy. That being said, is there any way I could impose upon you to try to de-orphan those de-PROD'd articles, just to get them out of the category? Or even just offer any suggestions for me to do it? I would read your sources and do it all myself but it looks like they're in Swedish. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 11:21, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Request Deleted Page to Amend
Would it be possible to receive a copy of the deleted page - JAS Worldwide? I wish to amend it so it can be accepted on to Wikipedia. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmroberson06 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've put it at User:Cmroberson06/JAS_Worldwide. Please submit any updated draft to articles for creation so they can comment on it before it is put back into mainspace. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Deprodding of Ardmore Presbyterian Church
I have removed the prod tag from Ardmore Presbyterian Church, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Jahaza (talk) 21:51, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikiproject!
Hello, Premeditated Chaos! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Articerodes thailandicus and other Articerodes articles
A search for "Articerodes" and "Nomura" finds some sources that may be reliable. Articerodes ohmumoi and Articerodes omomoi appear to be about the same thing, usually spelled "ohmomoi". Peter James (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Aaaah thanks. I was so mad I couldn't find anything. I'll have a look for that :D &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Requesting WP:REFUND of IFBB Mr. America
Recently, a number of long standing notable body building competitions were PROD'd, including this one. This one included multiple notable winners including Lou Ferrigno. Fifteen of the winners are noble in their own right, with the Mr. America contest being their staring point in the industry. Thanks in advance!  Scr ★ pIron IV 17:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've put it at User:ScrapIronIV/IFBB Mr. America for now. I would restore it completely but I'm concerned about lack of sources in its current state. I have no issue with you putting it back in mainspace once there are some sources in it :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Deprodding of Analog Expansion Bus
I have removed the prod tag from Analog Expansion Bus, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Pavlor (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Retrieving content on Surface Dial article
Is it possible if you could pull up the content that was on the Surface Dial article that you deleted a while back? I'd like to incorporate the sources and what was on the article into the Microsoft Surface article, in its own section. Since I am not an admin, I don't have access to deleted page content.  WikIan - ( talk )  06:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've stuck it at User:WikIan/Surface Dial for you. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks  WikIan - ( talk )  22:14, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Jack Bussey
Could I please request the reinstatement of the article. It didn't go to a debate as he has played in the Challenge Cup and also in the qualifiers in the Super League for the London Broncos, ie against the likes of the previous seasons SL champions Leeds. More than happy to add sources, but couldn't believe that it would be deleted as he already met the criteria. Or at least to my sandbox and you might as well lump in Jonathan Pownall under the same criteria.Fleets (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Ryan Burroughs
Could I please request that this deleted American internationals page be sent to my sandbox. Many thanks in advance.Fleets (talk) 08:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've put all 3 in your Userspace at User:Fleets/Jack Bussey, User:Fleets/Jonathan Pownall and User:Fleets/Ryan Burroughs respectively. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for all three.Fleets (talk) 16:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Help me please
Ive just started wiki editing and im so confused. Im adding constructive material but ClueBot tells me that it is vandalism. I just need help going down the right path to being successful here. I think im on my last chance or im blocked and I dont want that The Editors God (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Looking at your contributions history, it seems you have a couple of basic problems to overcome. First, your grammar is poor. Contractions like "I'm" and "can't" need apostrophes. There should only be one semi-colon in a sentence. If you're going to add things to Wikipedia, you need to be able to write with correct grammar and spelling. I suspect your grammar is one reason ClueBot is flagging your edits - vandals typically don't bother with good grammar either.


 * Second, you need to look at the content you're changing before you change it, and see if the change you're making makes any sense. For example, your edit at Fallout 4 altered this sentence:
 * "The resulting universe is thus a retro-futuristic one, where the technology has evolved enough to produce laser weapons, manipulate genes and create nearly-autonomous artificial intelligence, but all within the confines of 1950s' solutions like the widespread use of atomic power and vacuum tubes, as well as having the integrated circuitry of the digital age."
 * to this:
 * "The resulting universe is thus a retro-futuristic one; features include retro-futuristic cars that are designed as though to look the part of a 1940-1950's car. Most damaged buildings are unrecognizable as you cant really tell, but mostly unharmed buildings such as the Red Rocket gas station; you can tell it was designed to look retro. The technology has evolved enough to produce laser weapons, manipulate genes and create nearly-autonomous artificial intelligence, but all within the confines of 1950s' solutions like the widespread use of atomic power and vacuum tubes, as well as having the integrated circuitry of the digital age."
 * The first version is elegant and simple: it tells you very broadly about the visual style of the game without getting heavily into specifics. Your version is clunky. It goes right from the word retro-futuristic to talking about specific details of cars and buildings, without stopping to explain to the reader what retro-futurism might look like. Your version is also written very casually ("you cant really tell" is not encyclopedic language).


 * Some of your other edits (like the one about the Survivor's home being in Concord, Massachussets, or there being 300 locations in-game) have been reverted because they are not sourced. Wikipedia demands that information be sourced to a reliable source - that is, you have to show that it came from somewhere other than your brain. There may well be 300 locations in the game, but you need to find a published source (like a game review) that says that before you can claim it in an article. Same thing with the Concord tidbit. You need to find a source that says the fact is true, before we can put the fact in Wikipedia.


 * The other thing is, you're editing on Elder Scrolls and Fallout 4, which are very popular games and therefore they have very complete, very high-traffic articles. Lots of people have them on their watchlist, so lots of people will see any changes that get made. Edits to those kinds of very complete pages will be scrutinized much more than edits at a random low-traffic article. It might be best to practice in your sandbox for awhile, or find some smaller, less popular articles to practice style and sourcing at. You should also check out the New contributors' help page for extra assistance. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Multilateral exchange prod
Please restore Multilateral exchange per WP:REFUND. I was looking at this with a view to declining the prod, but you got to it first. I think the subject has some potential for expansion (and referencing). [This source discusses the principle in the context of agricultural biodiversity, and this source discusses it in the context of Marxian economics. I'm not intending to do any substantial work on the article, but I might go as far as adding those sources as further reading. [[User:Spinningspark|Spinning]]Spark 17:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Closing Rfc on Talk:Menachem Mendel Schneerson
I think you closed that Rfc nicely, and I like your edit to the article, but I think you overstepped your authority with the edit summary and the closure. The Rfc was about where' to put the mention of the incident, not how precisely to formulate that mention. In addition, that subject was not sufficiently discussed in the Rfc, because that wasn't the point, to be able to reach any conclusions. I would advice you to change your closure to reflect this point. Debresser (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair. My intent was to forestall another lengthy discussion being raised about the exact content of what to put, because it seems as though there are specific individuals on the talk page who don't want the issue to drop. I was also trying to balance inclusion of the mention without giving it undue weight or making it seem like Schneerson was the driver or somehow the instigator of the riots. I will clarify the close. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:17, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand. Your modification of the closing comment now made that clear in a better way, IMHO. Thank you for being responsive. Debresser (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for being cool about everything :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned genes
Hello! Just wanted to leave a quick note to say I haven't abandoned your orphaned gene list. I'm just having a slow couple of weeks. I'll keep poking through them and in a few weeks I'll have a bit more time to spend here. Thanks for collecting that list! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 06:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, no problem! They've been orphaned since 2009 after all, so no urgency :) Thanks for offering to help out on my weird little de-orphaning mission. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

List of Genoese towers in Corsica
Good work in creating this list. I've visited some of the towers and taken photos. In the past I've edited some of the articles on the individual towers and have even made a few tweaks to the list on the French wiki fr:Liste des tours génoises en Corse. I have a couple of books on the history of the towers but although I live in London my books are in Corsica. It will be a month or so before I visit again. Aa77zz (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The table incorrectly lists many towers as being Monument Historique (MH). I'm correcting these. The editor who originally created the wiki pages claimed incorrectly that all the Genoese towers were MH. Over the last few years I've corrected some of the articles and added more information. Some of the towers have completely disappeared and others are just a pile of stones. - Aa77zz (talk) 14:39, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, awesome! I'm glad to see that someone is getting some use out of it. I'll be honest, I relied a lot on the articles themselves because I don't speak a lick of French, and I found the search function on the French monument historique website difficult to wrangle even with machine translation. Thanks for making the corrections :) Maybe the column for "Monument Historique" could be updated instead to say something like "Preservation status", and then the column could be dark blue for MH status, a lighter blue for the General Inventory of Culture, and blank if it's not on either? If there are any that aren't on either, that is. I had originally planned to include a column for whether or not the towers were still extant, but I couldn't find enough info for that. If you have that information and want to stick in another column, I'm on board for helping make that happen. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh and also! I noticed you culled some entries on the basis that they are duplicates. I included all articles that were in Category:Towers in Corsica. Have you already redirected (or tagged for deletion) the existing en.wiki articles that you believe are duplicate towers? No point pulling them from the list if they still have their own articles. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I haven't culled any entries - yet. When I'm next in Corsica I plan to go through all the individual tower articles, make corrections and add what I can, which is likely to be very little. Unfortunately, it seems that for most of the towers very little is published about their history. I will also have to decide whether to use French or Corsican names for the towers. Most of the wiki articles were created with Corsican names, but google searches suggest that many of these are rarely if ever used. The historic documents reproduced in Grazini (1992) are in Italian (Genoese). The official language of the island is French and most Corsicans cannot speak Corsican fluently. And sadly many of the Corsicans who can speak the language do not speak it regularly to their children. - Aa77zz (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops, my mistake. I saw edit notes about duplicates and assumed you were pulling them. My bad. I think you're probably right to use French names if they're the most commonly used, with an included note about he original Corsican. What did you think about my other suggestions though, about the changing the MH column to "preservation status" (or "historical designation" or something) and inserting a column for ruined vs extant? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Request for userfication of Thomas Meehan III
Would you be willing to copy Thomas Meehan III and the associated talk and archived talk pages to my user space? I would like to review and see if there is anything verifiable that can be used elsewhere in the project. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 20:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Done, they are at User:VQuakr/Thomas Meehan III and User:VQuakr/Thomas Meehan III talk respectively. There were no talk page archives. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Cynthia Khalifeh
hello There, i would like to know more what is the meaning of your " premeditated chaos" about my article? This person is a legit actress with a large following and great career achievements in the middle east. Plus she already has a Wiki page in arabic that was approved years ago. Her following community asked for an english translation which is the reason behind our draft article about Cynthia khalifeh, which you have deleted. Here is the link: https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/سينتيا_خليفة And you may find her online social media existence under the name of : Cynthia Khalifeh. Cyncyncyncyn (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * First off, calm down, Premeditated Chaos is my username, not a statement of intent. Second, the article was deleted following a community discussion that you can find here: Articles for deletion/Cynthia Khalifeh. English Wikipedia has extremely strict guidelines on what topics are accepted, based on our ability to verify information about the topic. Our general notability guideline is here, with more specific guidelines for actors and actresses here. Based on those guidelines, Cynthia Khalifeh did not pass our requirements for an article to be kept on English Wikipedia. I did not participate in the discussion personally. I closed the debate as an administrator and deleted the article as a result of the discussion. If you have concerns, please bring them to deletion review, where they will review the discussion and your concerns and advise you whether or not they will reverse the result of the debate. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:27, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Recent G11
Yo PreChaos, I've just had an email from the ('implies shared use') User:Belfast Titanic Society querying why their Sandbox was deleted. So, in the interests of transparency, I'll leave them a TP note to come over here, if that's alright? Thanks for your help &mdash;  O Fortuna!   Imperatrix mundi.  14:27, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, also, PreChaos is the best abbreviation of my username I've ever heard. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)