User talk:Rcsprinter123/Archives/1

June 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Bowers (bus company) has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.hayfieldbusstationderbys.webs.com/operators.htm#587856507. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

English
In a recent edit to the page School bus yellow, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. –BMRR (talk) 19:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to The Monkey's Paw, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Philip Trueman (talk) 12:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Rcsprinter123
Hi Rcsprinter123. I noticed you created a Requests for Adminship page some time ago; I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. I think it's fair to warn you that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Wikipedia editing community sets very high standards for editors running for adminship. That being said, I strongly urge you to read Guide to requests for adminship, User:Davidwr/Administration is not for new users, and Not now, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that request and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Eagles  24/7  (C)  22:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Sixes
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Sixes, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.renewingthesixes.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Your additions of File:Sixes derbyshire map.jpg and File:Sixes logo.jpg and many other images have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Manchester Airport. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Snoozlepet (talk) 15:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Manchester Airport, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Snoozlepet (talk) 18:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you please explain why you remove the airport name from the infobox? This has not been discussed to remove the name. If you disagree, plesae take it to WP:AIRPORTS. All airport infoboxes have the airport's English and native name. Regards. Snoozlepet (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Cheltenham Spa
Please don't remove the redirection and copy/paste the content from Cheltenham again. There is no need for two articles. Stephenb (Talk) 17:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please explain what you are doing - it "may be "all for the best" but you are not adding any edit summary and you are merely duplicating content. This lookss like vandalism. Stephenb (Talk) 17:23, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not an explanation, merely an assertion (and is wrong - it doesn't "look" better at all). I ask again: WHY are you doing this? Stephenb (Talk) 17:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What? Please explain! I will happily take the discussion somewhere else, but you really should provide some explanation of what you are doing! Stephenb (Talk) 17:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Cheltenham Spa, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Stephenb (Talk) 17:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Funandtrvl (talk) 17:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Cumbria shootings, you may be blocked from editing. Rodhull andemu  20:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Cheltenham Spa, you may be blocked from editing. Stephenb (Talk) 13:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:Patricknoddy/Userboxes/Thomas Jefferson, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stephenb (Talk) 16:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bus routes in Wales
Template:Bus routes in Wales has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji (talk) 00:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Rcsprinter123, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Rcsprinter123. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

CANO
If you remove a prod tag, explain why you're removing it, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. Just blindly removing tags like that is seen as disruptive. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

RfA
I just reverted the edit you made to WP:RFA. You attempted to transclude a non-existing nomination—with the wrong capitalization to boot. Favonian (talk) 17:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

RfA
Hello Rcsprinter123, how are you? I see that you put yourself forward to serve as an administrator. That's a very tough job, and people will no doubt appreciate your offer to help. It looks like you made a few mistakes in the process and your edits to WP:RfA were reverted because they didn't work. Before you try and put yourself forward again, I'd like to ask you to reconsider. The standards required in an admin are really high these days. There are between 13 and 14 millon registered editors on Wikipedia; while there are around 1,700 admins. That's one-hundredth of one percent. Usually people with two year's experience and around 4,000 or 5,000 are getting to the point where they should consider becoming an admin. At the moment, you've been registered for six months and have less than 400 edits. If you applied now, you wouldn't be sucessful. Take at look at WP:NOTNOW. An admin needs quite a bit of experiencing creating and editing articles. Then they need to know about copyright policy (see WP:Copy), have experience building consensus (see WP:Consensus), contributing to policy discussions (see WP:Policy), and having experience with our deletion policy (see WP:XfD, WP:PROD, WP:CSD), and blocking policy. Notice all of these article have the prefix WP:, these are behind the scenes Wikipedia policy and discussion pages that people don't find under normal article searches. You've made a good start. Keep up the good work, follow some of those links and start to increase your involvement and, before long, you'll be ready for being an admin. All the best. — Fly by Night  ( talk ) 18:26, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your edits to articles, such as the edit you made to List of bus routes in Gloucestershire. This is a common mistake to make and has probably already been corrected. There is no need to sign your edits to article content, as the article's edit history serves the function of attributing contributions, so you only need to use your signature to make discussions more readable, such as on article talk pages or project pages such as the Village Pump. If you would like further information about distinguishing types of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. tedder (talk) 14:03, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello, tedder.the reason i keep putting my signature on that page is i created it, and it is only half-finished, and so that is there to tell visitors it is not complete. if there is a problem with this, please let me know. RCSprinter123 (talk) 14:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You need to put Under construction on the page to let other editors know it is a work in progress; but if you don't edit for some hours, it will be removed. HTH. Rodhull  andemu  19:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * There is a problem with that, I'm afraid. You should never sign articles. If you want to create a page then you can do it in your user space. For example, if you follow this red link you will find yourself on a page called User:Rcsprinter123/Sandbox. You can start an article just like you would normally and save it there. That's in your own user space, so provided it doesn't break any laws, and isn't offensive, it will stay there for as long as needs be. No-one will delete it, and no-one will edit it. Once the article's done, cut and paste it over to the article space where it will create an article for public use. — Fly by Night  ( talk ) 19:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * All Wikipedia articles are a work in progress. Despite that, the fact remains that we are not allowed to put our signatures in articles.  It doesn't matter whether you created the article or whether you're in the process of making big changes to it.  A better solution is to find an appropriate Template Message and place it at the top of the page.  I've gone ahead and added one to that page that I think will be helpful. –BMRR (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Also (and this is very important): please provide an Edit Summary before saving your edits. Thanks. –BMRR (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Greater Manchester/Derbyshire Bus Route 358


The article Greater Manchester/Derbyshire Bus Route 358 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * unremarkable bus route

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AD 15:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Skyline 199


The article Skyline 199 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * unremarkable bus route

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AD 15:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Red links
What makes you think there are no more red links? Maybe you set your skin so they are a different colour for you, but I assure you they exist for most people. S B Harris 17:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Other people's user pages
You're not really supposed to edit other people's user pages, and certainly not create one for another active user who you've never interacted with. Would you like to explain why you did? Alzarian16 (talk) 17:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Skyline 199 for deletion
The article Skyline 199 is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Skyline 199 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. AD 19:02, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Greater Manchester/Derbyshire Bus Route 358 for deletion
The article Greater Manchester/Derbyshire Bus Route 358 is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Greater Manchester/Derbyshire Bus Route 358 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. AD 19:02, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Bus route articles
Most routes aren't notable enough for Wikipedia, with only a few exceptions. Most can be covered in list form, or merged into one article. Another site such as this one would probably appreciate your help more. AD 19:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

To start another discussion, click add section at the top of the page. RCSprinter123 (talk) 12:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Rcsprinter123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion nomination of Skyline 199


A tag has been placed on Skyline 199, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. AD 13:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The above article was deleted as a result of an AfD. You can't just restore the article. If you disagree with the outcome you are free to take it to deletion review, but recreating it without discussion and then demanding full protection is going to get you nowhere. Trying to game requests for page protection is disruptive and it's not the first time you've done it. Nev1 (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Do not edit


A tag has been placed on Template:Do not edit requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji 11:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

-ton
Just a couple of notes for you: I realize you're fairly new around here, so you may not be familiar with all the nuances of how things work around here — so I hope that helps you understand a bit better why I keep retagging the article. Bearcat (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) "-ton" has nothing whatsoever to do with nanotechnology, so "nanotechnology stubs" isn't the right stub notice for it.
 * 2) An article is not properly categorized on the basis of a stub category alone, or if the only "real" category on it is one that doesn't actually exist (i.e. it shows up as a red link when you view the page). For an article to be properly categorized, it has to have a real content category on it which actually exists and shows up as a blue link.
 * 3) If an article isn't properly categorized, then the uncat tag is not optional; it's not a question of whether the page looks "better" with or without the tag, but of whether the page is properly filed in a real category or not. If it isn't, then the tag has to be there whether you like it or not; if you want the tag off, then you need to actually find the correct, existing category for it.

This is getting ridiculous
You were stopped from creating Important bus routes in Derbyshire, so you came up with Key bus routes in Derbyshire? Changing the title doesn't make it any more appropriate. You should read WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT some time. Alzarian16 (talk) 18:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm beyond the limits of assuming good faith about your actions. What you did there is deliberate deceit to circumvent the deletion process. This sort of thing has been explained to you before, but you're failing to understand or take on-board concerns.
 * On a more positive note, I see you created this in your userspace, which is a perfectly decent stub of a notable school. So it's not like you're unable to create and edit articles appropriately. Please consider your actions with bus-related articles, because it would be a shame for you to have to end your time here as I can see you're perfectly capable of editing appropriately. Thanks. AD 19:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer permission
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   20:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Userbox
Template:Userbox no-design-many is an exact copy of User:Alzarian16/UBX2 with the ID changed. As well as being a bit pointless, this causes copyright attribution problems. Since there's an existing discussion on the same topic at the admin incidents noticeboard, I've mentioned it there: see Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Alzarian16 (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Burger King
for taking the time to look at the article. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 20:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Toilet of Doom


The article The Toilet of Doom has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * non-notable book

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Toilet of Doom


A tag has been placed on The Toilet of Doom requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. RCSprinter123 (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The Toilet of Doom
I'm confused. First you said "do not delete", then you placed a speedy tag on it.

(e/c) Well it looks like the article was deleted as I was typing this message. If you didn't want it deleted after all, please contact, the deleting admin, who can userfy it for you. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 20:28, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Rcsprinter123, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Rcsprinter123/The Toilet of Doom. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I should point out that you filling out the template on your own won't make you unblocked, you need to actually place an unblock request and wait for an admin to review it. You also uploaded the file just over a month ago, not ages, and one month before that you were explicitly warned about uploading copyrighted images. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Glossop/GA1
Quick-failed, unfortunately. You, the nominator, have once and haven't gone through the article to thoroughly improve it before nominating. Please see my comments at the GA review page. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Good article nominations
It looks like you've been trying to nominate some articles for a good article review. You don't need to edit Good article nominations (and if you do, will likely be reverted by the GA bot). You just need to follow the instructions on that page under "How to nominate an article". -- Beloved Freak  19:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect archiving procedure
Hey, Rcsprinter. Just a procedural note, you moved Talk:Elizabeth II to an archive page with the "move" feature. Archiving is done with the cut and paste procedure; rather than moving the whole page, we just cut out individual sections and paste them in the archives. Moving the whole page, among other things, moves recent and ongoing discussions into archives - that isn't good, obviously! In addition, a lot of pages have a box that says "This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I..." These templates inform you when the page is set up for automatic archiving. On these pages, users never need to perform archiving procedures themselves- it's all automatic. No action is required on your part to fix this- it's already being resolved. I'm just writing to inform you of the proper procedure. If you've performed other archiving attempts, feel free to let me know and I'll see if any action needs to be taken on them. The minor procedural mistake aside, thanks for your efforts to improve Wikipedia! Hopefully this will clarify any confusion to prevent further mistakes. If you have any questions, let me know. Regards,  Swarm   X 20:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Good article nominations
It looks like you've been trying to nominate some articles for a good article review. You don't need to edit Good article nominations (and if you do, will likely be reverted by the GA bot). You just need to follow the instructions on that page under "How to nominate an article". -- Beloved Freak  19:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect archiving procedure
Hey, Rcsprinter. Just a procedural note, you moved Talk:Elizabeth II to an archive page with the "move" feature. Archiving is done with the cut and paste procedure; rather than moving the whole page, we just cut out individual sections and paste them in the archives. Moving the whole page, among other things, moves recent and ongoing discussions into archives - that isn't good, obviously! In addition, a lot of pages have a box that says "This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I..." These templates inform you when the page is set up for automatic archiving. On these pages, users never need to perform archiving procedures themselves- it's all automatic. No action is required on your part to fix this- it's already being resolved. I'm just writing to inform you of the proper procedure. If you've performed other archiving attempts, feel free to let me know and I'll see if any action needs to be taken on them. The minor procedural mistake aside, thanks for your efforts to improve Wikipedia! Hopefully this will clarify any confusion to prevent further mistakes. If you have any questions, let me know. Regards,  Swarm   X 20:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

My userpage
Hi there. Was wondering if there was any reason you edited my userpage? I see you were trying to play with the displaytitle. Are you trying to do something similar or do you have an issue with me doing it? Worm  21:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No need to apologise, that's great thing about this place, everything can be put back. If you are trying to do it yourself, you will find the trick to the displaytitle magic word is that the page title must still resolve to its correct title. So you can change the font, what letters are capitals, or use display:none to hide words, but you can't actually change what's there. Does that make sense? My page title isn't a link either... If that is what you were after. What are you trying to do? perhaps I can help  Worm   22:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Chapel-en-le-Frith and GA nominations
Hello, I've reviewed Chapel-en-le-Frith against the GA criteria and unfortunately the article is not at that standard yet. I had a quick look at the other articles you have nominated and, although I won't review them, I have to say that it's unlikely they'll pass as they are. You might want to consider withdrawing them. It's by no means required that you have edited an article to nominate it at WP:GAN, but it certainly helps. If you've spent some time editing an article, you will be familiar with the sources used and be able to respond to any concerns of the reviewer.

I've noticed that you've started reviewing nominations too. That's great, as we are always backlogged at WP:GAN and any help is much appreciated. If you don't mind a little friendly advice though, bearing in mind the articles you've just nominated, I'm a little concerned that you don't yet have a strong grasp of the GA criteria and it might be better to take it a little slower and hold off on reviewing any more for the time being. Please don't take this personally, it certainly took me quite a while to get the confidence to review articles and even since then, it has been a learning process. Many editors find it easier to first develop an article to GA standard, and get their first nomination passed, before they move on to reviewing. Again, that's not required, just something to think about. Let me know if you have any questions.-- Beloved Freak  21:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
There is a thread at WP:ANI concerning you. Nev1 (talk) 13:23, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: GAN for Princes Street, Dunedin
Hi Rcsprinter - don;t want to seem impatient, but I thought I'd better check to see whether you realised I asked you a couple of questions a few days back at Talk:Princes Street, Dunedin/GA1...? Grutness...wha?  00:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * [[Image:WikiThanks.png]] Thanks for helping get this successfully to GA! :) Grutness...wha?  21:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

List of bus routes in Derbyshire at WP:FLC
Hi Rcsprinter123, thanks for your nomination. You have several comments to address, and I think it'd be a good idea to withdraw the nomination so you can work on them before re-nominating. What do you reckon? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've withdrawn the nomination due to lack of interest from you. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of New Mills
The article New Mills you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:New Mills for things which need to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 14:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
In a recent edit to the page Wikipedia:Manual of Style (accessibility), you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. RexxS (talk) 21:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

My talkpage
Regarding this; two things. First off, I have a large notice at my talkpage essentially saying that it's a civility free zone; if you want to swear at me, that's perfectly fine (I don't speak like that off my talkpage, but I leave it open for people who are frustrated and want to have someplace to vent). The user I was responding to is someone I worked on NPP with for a long time, and someone who isn't bothered by swearing. Secondly, Wikipedia isn't censored; we have articles on several swear words, including the words cunt and fuck. Now if you don't like swearing, that's not a problem; in my communications with you, I will make it a point to avoid such language. However, please also respect my views on it as well. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 07:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Question about multipleissues tag
Hi! I noticed you recently tagged Bill's Bus with some concerns -- can you explain in more detail? I've worked on the article to make it sourced, factual, and neutral -- it's a small-town commercial service so it's probably never going to be a featured-quality article, but I think the article is reasonable as it is. Thanks! Dreamyshade (talk) 18:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Just needs work. Linking to and tone. S'all. I can remove the tag if needs be. RCSprinter123 (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of BBC Radio 2
Hello, I have noticed that there aren't any sources, citations nor references in these following sections: Presenters and programmes, Notable programming, Specialist programming, Past presenters, and Controllers only has one for one person. I am not currently reviewing this at this moment, I just wanted to give you advise before reviewing goes on for this article. If you can get those concerns dealt with, your article's chances at passing will be greater, thanks AJona1992 (talk) 19:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello. I have quick-failed the article because a substantial amount is needed before it meets the criteria. Other people have commented on your talk page that you appear to need to develop an understanding of the criteria. My advice would be to take articles to Peer review before WP:GAC. The JPS talk to me 11:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

MiszaBot
Greetings, your config for MiszaBot was incorrect. I made the appropriate corrections, then moved your archive_2 and archive_3 contents into archive_1, which the misza bot will add other threads to probably in the next 18 hours or so. Your bot should be good to go. Should you have any questions, feel free to ask. I will watch your userpage for a couple of days if you wish to respond. Take Care!! -Pparazorback (talk) 23:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. The last step to complete your configuration is to get rid of the two archive pages that I blanked for you that has it's former content backed up in Archive 1.  Go into the User talk:Rcsprinter123/Archive_2 and User talk:Rcsprinter123/Archive_3 pages and replace the text talkarchive with db-u1 keeping the brackets so those pages will get deleted as they are no longer needed. -Pparazorback (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Diary of a Wimpy Kid - Plot
Your addition to Diary of a Wimpy Kid has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. The Plot section appears to match multiple Internet pages which predate the edit. There is no attribution to an external source or indication that this is a quote. Google search: selection from Plot.SBaker43 (talk) 03:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Redirects and other edits
Hello Rcsprinter123, why are you creating redirects such as Htrowlinek, Noitats sub Edyh and Strat-Pop? redirects are supposed to be alternative names for things, or alternative spellings, or common misspellings, to help readers easily find the article they are looking for. Do you really think people will be looking for Hyde bus station by writing it backwards? It seems like you are creating these redirects just because you can, I can't see that they serve any useful purpose, but I'm interested to hear your opinion before I tag them for deletion. -- Beloved Freak  10:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Just bored. Can delete if you want.RCSprinter123 (talk) 11:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, well please don't do stuff just because you're bored. :) Try to make sure that all your changes are actually useful. If you're bored, and want to do something Wikipedia-related, why don't you read through some of the policy & guideline pages? Ok, they can be quite boring, but there are often interesting discussions on the talk pages that might help you to learn more about how things are done around here. I noticed in your recent contributions you seem to have been trying a few things out. I don't know if you ever go over your contributions to see if they stay, but you might notice that quite a few of your recent ones have been undone by other editors for various reasons. It might help to go back over some of these and try to learn from mistakes. One thing I noticed in particular is that you seem to have been removing a lot of red links. You don't need to do that. Have a read of WP:REDLINK. It's ok to leave red links if there is likely to be an article written at some point. For example, towns are usually always considered notable, so you might as well leave those linked. If it seems like no one would ever write an article (for example the husband or wife of a famous person who isn't famous themselves), then it would be ok to go ahead and remove the red link.


 * Another thing I wanted to mention was reviewing pending changes. Make sure you are only rejecting changes that are obvious vandalism, or violate WP:BLP or another policy. If a change is not controversial, but you disagree with it, just accept the change and then manually "undo" the edit as normal, explaining why. This edit rejecting changes to the Reese Witherspoon article was correct, as that was obvious vandalism. This edit to the Twitter article was not right. The change by the anonymous user was not remotely controversial, and not vandalism. Even if you disagreed with it, you should no have rejected it. Furthermore, the editor in question had explained what they were doing in an edit summary. Please read Reviewing again. If you're not careful, you might have the reviewer right removed. -- Beloved Freak  12:11, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Article layout
Hi again :) Just a minor thing, but please check out the manual of style for article layout, especially the bits at the end as you seem to be rearranging navigation templates, external links, stubs etc so that they're in a different order. -- Beloved Freak  12:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

UK School Infobox
Thanks. TheAuthor22 [Talk] 17:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Buxton Community School
Hello Rcsprinter123. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Buxton Community School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Secondary schools are usually considered notable. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  17:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC) n 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. We hope (talk) 21:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Twenty-five-million pool
Twenty-five-million pool, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Twenty-five-million pool and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Twenty-five-million pool during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

New Mills
Hi Rcsprinter123. I've had a quick look at New Mills.

I will not be reviewing if it is renominated at WP:GAN in the near future, I tend not to do two reviews on the same article; someone else will probably do the review and they might look at the last review. The problem you have is that most of my comments have not been addressed, there is still a citation needed flag in the article and most of the references that use a web citation are still in "raw" format (I've changed ref 6 to what it should be, so that you can see) - that is not too difficult to update. Incidentally ref 20 is in the correct format, but the only thing on it (when I checked today ) was "This site is currently under development, please drop by again soon!" - so that does not provide any WP:Verification. I'm sorry, but I would not recommend resubmission in its current state - it could well be "quick failed", or failed. Pyrotec (talk) 11:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Wren Park Primary School
Hello Rcsprinter123, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wren Park Primary School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Tikiwont (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No sweat bur as you seem to be interested in schools I let you know. This one has already been proposed for deletion, so it would need to be AfD but in general merging is the better option, either to the village or to a school district or the like. Which is what you'd likely hear at an AfD. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

London Underground
Erm....do you think you'll be able to get the references for this article? It's a big job and I note that you've not really edited this article before. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Transport? Derby? New Users?
I guees you know about this. Yiou do know they will open up the industrial transport bit just for us? I'd be surprised if they have no bus stuff, I ve seen tramway stuff in the stores. Be good to meet and there will be new wikipedians Victuallers (talk) 17:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC) Thats a pity, but pleased to hear of your interest. Maybe you could send a delegate/mate? Do feel free to load up some museum images. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

-villages
All towns and villages are considered suitable for individual Wikipedia articles. I am at a loss to know why you placed a transwikified speedy deletion tag on Ignacewo, Podlaskie Voivodeship -- where would it possibly be transwikified to? Perhaps you mean that there is an article in the Polish Wikipedia, but the English Wikipedia covers the entire world-- the only distinction between countries is that the articles here are written in English. (And, of course, that we do currently have fuller coverage of the English speaking countries--but that is something we try to remedy, not perpetuate. )   DGG ( talk ) 21:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Maintenance tags
Hello Rcsprinter123, I'm a little concerned by two of your recent edits. You added four maintenance tags to Wren Park Primary School. Fair enough, it needs references to secondary sources. I removed the WP:OR tag, as I don't think it's really necessary on top of requesting extra sources. There are only two sentences, and they don't strike me as original research, they are just not very well sourced. The article has a category, if you can think of any that are missing, wouldn't it be just as easy to add them yourself? As for the orphan tag, it's nowhere near being an orphan - did you look at the "what links here" page? Then, you added three tags to Grevillea centristigma. I left the orphan tag as, I believe, articles are considered orphans if they are linked to by less than three, although this is linked to by two other articles, so it's not a big problem. I have no idea why you added confusing and disputed though as you haven't explained them on the talkpage. As I can't see any reason the accuracy of the article would be disputed, and it doesn't seem confusing to me, I've removed the tags. If you still think they need to be there, please explain such tags on the article talkpage.

It's ok to add a tag like unreferenced to an article that has no references, without explaining, becuase it will be obvious to another editor what needs to be done. If it's not obvious though, it's really helpful to explain why you tag an article on the talkpage. Otherwise, it just looks like random tagging. -- Beloved Freak  22:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Pointless edits?
Please explain how my edits to Chapel-en-le-Frith High School were pointless. You also might want to read WP:OWN. --Simple Boba.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 16:23, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Chapel-en-le-Frith High School
Rcsprinter, Wikipedia is not a playground - please do not make further edits to school articles before you have read and fully understood WP:WPSCH/AG. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Your editing
I've been looking at the rather long list of complaints and warnings on your talk page archive, and checking your editing logs. We certainly encourage younger editors to contribute to articles, but I really don't believe you are ready to start on work that needs a lot of experience, such as checking and reverting other people's work, or GA review, for example, or making redirects, or wanting to be an admin. Please consider taking some the advice you  have already  been given, check out  all  the hints and tips pages we have, and concentrate on  editing  and building  your own  articles for a while, and if you  need any  help, don't  hesitate to  ask  me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion tag removed
I've removed the F5 speedy deletion template you placed on File:HenryFiteHouse.jpg because it's not a non-free image. Regards. Barret (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Chesterfield/GA1
Hello Rcsprinter123, I just reviewed an article that you nominated for GA, Chesterfield. There are several things that need to be fixed, so I am putting this article "on hold". You can read my comments here.--12george1 (talk) 02:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Good article reviewing
Hello Rcsprinter123, there's currently a discussion that mentions you at Wikipedia talk:Good article reassessment. -- Beloved Freak  08:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Invite
Hi RCS - do you know about this. Last chance for some time to record the transport history in the silk mill, trolley buses? Victuallers (talk) 23:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at DVD, you may be blocked from editing. ''Please don't mess about as you have done here. The V in DVD is not "Vibrating" as I am sure you know'' Simple Boba.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 10:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Karl Marx
Thank you for the update! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I am confused with Talk:Karl Marx/GA1. Is this article passed or not? What issues are to be fixed? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

incorporating into the tube
I saw this. The best way to discuss these people is in chronological order in the history. Good start though. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

GAN reviews
Hi, whilst I commend you enthusiasm for Wikipedia, I have noticed that you don't seem to have grasped the basic concepts of reviewing good article nominations. Your reviews are being discussed at WT:Good article reassessment. Might I politely suggest that you lay off for a while, perhaps follow other reviewers to understand how the process works? Jezhotwells (talk) 21:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:ANI discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding GA reviewing. The thread is Conduct of User:Rcsprinter123 when reviewing nominations for good article status.The discussion is about the topic TOPICBAN. Thank you. —Jezhotwells (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Karl Marx
No worries, we all learn by trying. The beauty of the Wikipedia is that it will be here for ever, and it always allows people to try and help in various ways. I am sure in a while you'll master the reviewing process. Till then, you may want to join an active WikiProject and perhaps try your hand at the B-class reviews, for example? Those are less formal then GA ones. You may want to talk to some people about how they do B-class review first, to get a feeling for them. Take care, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:48, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Items removed
elements cross-posted to User talk:Jdforrester and User talk:Rcsprinter123

Hi, Rcsprinter123, you'll likely not be pleased about this but I have suppressed a number of edits to your userspace which reveal too much personally identifiable information about yourself. I've done this per policy and for your own protection and safety on-line as you are a self-declared minor. I'm really sorry about that and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add it. For some useful information on privacy and safety, take a look at Guidance for younger editors. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages - James F. (talk) 22:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * No worries. :-)
 * James F. (talk) 11:10, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer status revoked
I've removed your reviewer status. Reviewing contains guidelines on how to use this feature: it is intended for blatantly inappropriate edits rather than general reverts on editorial decision. You have repeatedly misused this feature to undo edits you simply disagreed with, including significant edits such as this one. If in future you feel that you are able to use this tool responsibly you may re-apply at Requests for permissions/Reviewer. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:23, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * can somebody please remove the user box and topicon on user:Rcsprinter123 that says it has reviewer rights?  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message  13:41, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I have done that. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message

Seeking to adopt?
I've just noticed that your user page has a userbox saying "This experienced editor is seeking to adopt new users". Unfortunately, I don't think you have anywhere near the expertise required to be adopting new users at the moment - in fact, I think you really need some mentoring yourself. I would hope that you would now be able to recognise this, and as part of a new commitment about your future editing here, I would hope you would agree to remove that userbox. (I know you can't remove it yourself at the moment, but if you ask, I'm sure someone will do it for you). Anyone agree or disagree? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, would you mind removing it?  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message
 * Done. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I must give you credit for your response to all of this - you are being constructive and positive about it. (And I do also want to say that I have seen a lot of very good content work from you) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:39, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * How do you mean?  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message
 * I mean 1) you have been calm about the issues being discussed and are responding well to our suggestions (I've seen plenty of people in similar situations getting angry and emotional), and 2) You've done good work on buses and transport, amongst other things - and I wanted to point that out so that it doesn't look like we're all being 100% negative towards you -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, thanks. (Obviously I'd use your talk page to reply but, I can't.) I'm sorry about the navbox meat colour thing. It just looks more meaty!

But I appreciate your patience in me. Even though I can't edit, I'm still logged in and looking through all the essays and things. Thanks again, and Jezhotwells too.  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message
 * The key thing you need to understand and adhere to is consensus - if you don't like the way something is done, that doesn't mean there isn't a good reason for doing it that way. You can try things yourself, but once reverted you must get a consensus to re-do the change, and that has to be done openly on the appropriate Talk page. Anyway, you're doing the right thing while blocked - reading essays, policies, etc. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Suffolk Bus routes
Sure I'd love to. Are you sure you want to do a whole Suffolk page though? In my experience I have found it much easier doing a particular town or a group of towns close to each other. It would be great if we worked together. Would you want to help me with the Colchester page and maybe together we will do the now deleted Lowestoft & Gt Yarmouth page again, huh? The only thing why I'm trying to convince you to change from all of Suffolk, is that a lot of the work is already done, as I have done an Ipswich & Woodbridge, and a Bury St.Edmunds & Newmarket page. Do you live in Suffolk? Tell me what you decide. &#39;&#39;&#39;Adam mugliston&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 10:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * All right then. Well first, we need some clean up. The best order is leaving the operator to the end. I think the best order is: Route, STart, End, Via, Operator. Plus, we should colour code, as I did in all my pages. And also, do you live in Suffolk? (I do) Adam mugliston  Talk  17:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

And also, I forgot, don't include teeny weeny bus routes that do one run a week or one run a month or something like that. And never shorten operator names (I corrected it). Adam mugliston Talk  17:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * How are we sharing out the work? Plus, you need to make the table wider (96%) and always include the bus station if the bus stops there. Adam mugliston  Talk  17:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I setup a talk page just for us, as I thought it may come in useful, when we start working together. Find it here: User talk:Adam mugliston/Rcsprinter123. From now on, I will write there and please reply or write to me on the new page too. Thanks. When are you usually online? Adam mugliston  Talk  17:32, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Mail
Again Adam mugliston  Talk  15:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * YOU GOT MAIL!!! (I got bored with the template) Adam mugliston  Talk  19:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Same again Adam mugliston  Talk  19:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

A new concept
Hey Rcsprinter123. Mind if I introduce you to Revert, Block, Ignore? Psychologically, vandals are mucking up wikipedia for fun. The Revert, Block, Ignore process denies them of the fun as quick as possible. Why am I mentioning this? Well, an example has just come up. You tagged User:Mikeymand as blocked, even though he'd been quiet for a few weeks. That evening, my talk page was attacked. It's no big deal, but just something to keep in mind for the future. <font color="#000">WormTT &middot; &#32;(talk) 07:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Twi Wikipedia
Ok, this is not directly relevant to the English Wikipedia, but why on earth have you created an article about WIlliam Shakespeare in English on a foreign-language Wikipedia? We have the English-language Wikipedia, we have the simple English Wikipedia, you really shouldn't add articles in English to other Wikipedias, even if they are pretty much defunct. Adding an interwiki link to it from our Shakespeare article is really not helpful to anyone either.-- Beloved Freak  12:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Wilbysuffolk/Shutdown
You can't use G1 on pages in user namespace as they are specifically excluded. As such I've removed your CSD of the above page. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Signpost by mail
Hi Rcsprinter123, this is an interesting idea! Can you explain a bit more how it works (are you going to print out the PDF version? who is going to pay the postage?). And perhaps it should be clarified to which countries the offer extends. Regards, HaeB (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I do it all. I just print it out and send it. I can pay all the postage etc, any country, any time of year. Unfortunately nobody has subscribed yet.  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message  18:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Just typical isn't it...
I'd just finished replying and I get a message. :P I've responded to your vandalism work and put up the test - I've been away for the bank holiday. One of your suggested vandalism points isn't vandalism, please try to be careful when labelling vandalism. <font color="#000">WormTT &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Just typical isn't it... I was looking at the results and I got this message.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  09:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of The Meanest Genie 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!


 * x2 Froggerlaura (talk) 19:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I found two reviews of this book from The Times Literary Educational Supplement in a database, but unfortunately I could not get full text access. You might get some help retrieving a copy of the articles at WP:REX. Here are the details  Spinning Spark 
 * I have included the TES Magazine reference below to the article. Question at DYK. Froggerlaura (talk) 00:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that the second of the two is either a different book or the database has the wrong author. Anyway, you only put in the first one so you probably noticed that already and were kind enough not to point out my mistake.  Spinning  Spark  08:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Authors: Thorn, Michael Source: Times Educational Supplement, 20/09/2002, Issue 4499, p14, 1/2p, 1 Color Photograph Document Type: Book Review Subject Terms: BOOKS -- Reviews DOUBLE Fudge (Book) SNAGGLETOOTH'S Mystery (Book) MAGGOT Pie (Book) OPERATION Timewarp (Book) Abstract: Reviews several books on children's literature. 'Double Fudge,' by Judy Blume; 'Snaggletooth's Mystery,' by Gene Kemp; 'Maggot Pie,' by Michael Lawrence; 'Operation Timewarp,' by Kate Reid. ISSN: 0040-7887 Accession Number: 7518097 Database: UK/EIRE Reference Centre

Authors: Davidson, Philippa Source: Times Educational Supplement, 15/04/1994, Issue 4059, p17, 1/4p Document Type: Book Review Subject Terms: CHILDREN'S literature BOOKS -- Reviews Abstract: Reviews several children's books. `White Feathers,' by Stephanie Baudet'; `Maggot Pie,' by Joan Carlyon; `The Skeleton Upstairs,' by Griselda Gifford; `The Yesterday Girl,' by Joan Carlyon; `Alvarez and the Golden Treasure,' by Val Reason; `The Breath of Demons,' by Stephanie Baudet; `Neptaur,' by Joan Carlyon; `For the Time Being,' by Kay Mac Manus; `Refugee,' by Maggie Paun; More. ISSN: 0040-7887 Accession Number: 9405193376 Database: UK/EIRE Reference Centre


 * This is a British book, so the Times Educational Supplement probably won't have any reviews on it, I never even heard of TES Magazine, and to be honest I don't really care any more and would rather just drop this whole DYK for now.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:12, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's certainly an option you're free to take - DYK nominations do get withdrawn by nominators sometimes, and someone will probably go ahead and remove it after a few more days. But the Times Educational Supplement is indeed a British publication, and did indeed have a review of the book as per the details Spinningspark gave above. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * In future, please do not ask for help if you are not prepared to accept it graciously when it is given.  Spinning Spark  14:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, sorry, I'm just giving up on it.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

How's it going?
Hey Rcsprinter123, how's it going? I'm sure you know you've got a little over 4 hours to finish your final test - good luck with that. I'll have a look at the DYK you've dropped, see if I can give it that final push. Sorry about not being around to help sooner, I've been rather busy with that pesky real life. Hope all's well, let me know if it's not! <font color="#000">WormTT &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, sorry, I haven't been able to get on much; I'll finish the test now. My absolutely rubbish internet connection keeps failing. BTW, thanks for helping with my DYK. Will it be featured on the main page now?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It was looking good, but now it's been nominated for deletion :S --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Which is fair enough, it's borderline notability. I've commented on the deletion page. Don't be disheartened though, you wrote a good article, it's the topic that's being looked at, not the work. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Well done indeed. I'd suggest I still hang around for a bit as a mentor, but from the work I've seen you do recently, you have improved massively. You've done a good job working on articles, even if they're currently looking like deletion possibilities. As long as you keep away from "reviewing" work I think you'll be able to function well on the encyclopedia. <font color="#000">WormTT &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. What will you do as my mentor then?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:10, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * roughly what I've been doing anyway, Being available for questions, giving you a hand with whatever you need, keeping an eye on your edits and so on. We can have a chat about where things went wrong too, but there's no rush with that. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 18:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Your signature
links to a user page of an unregistered user. Please link to your correct user name, lest someone decide to register "Rcsprinter" and effectively confuse everyone who clicks on your signature. And now you'll have to register that name yourself, so no one decides to do such a thing. Thanks, / ƒETCH COMMS  /  22:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, right, OK, thanks.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  07:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Fetch, we can't register User:Rcsprinter because it's too similar to User:RCSPRINTER. Are you able to create the account, or should Rcsprinter123 [mailto:accounts-enwiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org request an account by email]? <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * RCSPRINTER was me about a year ago, but I forgot the password and created Rcsprinter123 instead. I've changed the links in my sig, what should I do now?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  08:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've left Fetchcomms a message, as I believe he has access to the account creation tool. Basically, someone needs to manually create the account, so it doesn't get abused. For now, we'll have to wait. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:28, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, given that it's too similar to the other account to be created, there should be little risk of abuse, but any user with admin or accountcreator rights can create it—so I've done that, with a random password. Cheers, / ƒETCH COMMS  /  18:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And to prevent confusion with the old RCSPRINTER account, you can use the template formeraccount. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  18:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers Fetchcomms, appreciated. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 20:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Careful with those parameters
Hi, changed ten instances of Uckfield to Uckparameter. Haven't looked at your other edits. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry! I think the semi-automated software has a mind of it's own sometimes... :)  Rcsprinter  (talk)  20:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Amersham station
I notice that you have moved this station to "railway station". However. "x station" is an established way of describing a station that has interchange facilities that mean it is both a National railway station and a station for another network (in this case the London Underground). You may wish to contact one of the railway projects (for example WikiProject Trains) before you carry out a lot of edits that will, I fear, be reversed. Britmax (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Interchange symbols
Hi, re edits like - is it necessary to have the three symbols in the map and in the caption below the map in addition to the top line of the infobox? In the map, it's confusing because the casual reader may assume that one of the symbols, and not the red snooker ball, marks the position of the station. It's also getting very much into WP:ICONDECORATION territory. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, Euston station has got Underground, Overground, and Rail. There's only a few with all three, some with two, and most I've only put one.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but why are they necessary in three different places, especially because of the possible confusion on the map? -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's just the infobox template does that; I can change it if you like.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  16:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 15:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotice List of bus routes in England
Template:Editnotice List of bus routes in England has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- Selket Talk 19:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Moray An Par (talk) 06:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Editor review and AfDs
Heya Rcsprinter123. Firstly, may I apologise for not spending as much time with you since I began mentoring you, as I appear to have become very busy in general. As to your question on my talk page, during an editor review, users will hopefully dig deep into your editing history, and comment on what they see. I'd like to say that comments will be constructive and hightlight difficulties, but it does depend on the editor who performs the review. It is something that I think is very useful though, as it may highlight small mistakes you are making or ways to improve before they escalate into larger issues, such as the one we had previously at good article review.

Secondly, I'd like to discuss the current issues on AfD. I see you've been closing debates as a non-admin. This is an area I've seen a lot of people trip up on in the past. Although admin status is "no big deal" and an experienced editor should be able to judge consensus, they additional "authority" of an admin on difficult debates - including AfDs - has become a de facto requirement of the community. In AfD, one of the main reasons for this is that only Admins can delete, and if they decide an article should be deleted the buck stops with them. (An admin who regularly deletes against consensus is likely to have their tools removed)

So, Non-admin closures are allowed, but only in situations where there there is a CLEAR outcome, no possibility of arguments. Speedy keeps (according to the criteria) are also allowed. They must be marked as a non-admin closure though, as they could possibly be challenged. It's an area that I try to keep out of, as even our best non-admin closers come unstuck. If I were you, I'd stick to commenting on AfDs, making your voice heard - a much more important role, rather than the procedural close.

Finally, I'd like to talk about your alternate account, Sprinting faster. I was vaguely aware of it (I think you commented on my page while I was away) but had forgotten to watch it. Can I ask why you felt the need to have an alternate account? I have one User:WormTT, because of my signature, but I've never felt the need to use it. There are very few reasons I can see for having an alternate account, and I was wondering what yours was. <font color="#000">WormTT · (talk) 08:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'll stick to just voting. The secondary account was originally just for fighting and reverting vandalism. It just kind of went up from that though, so I'll take it down.  Rcsprinter   (talk)  15:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Good to hear. There are some legitimate reasons for alternate accounts, and technically compartmentalising is one, but I don't agree with it and it would probably be best if you stopped using it. certainly gets confusing if you're not signing the name you're logged in as! <font color="#000">WormTT  · (talk) 15:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * So what now? Should I go in for my editor review?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If you like :) <font color="#000">WormTT  · (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Precise Point Positioning


The article Precise Point Positioning has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
 * Incomprehensible.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Rcs, with regards to the above article, and Rocky Rogan, please do not use machine translators to translate articles directly, they are generally too poor quality to be of any use-- Jac 16888 Talk 04:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Template talk:Welcome-anon-vandal
Hi, I noticed your edit request at Template talk:Welcome-anon-vandal and was wondering if there is a reason you did not just make the edit yourself. The template in question is only semi-protected, and your account should be able to make the edit. I don't see anything wrong with your proposal, I was just curious why you were doing it via request. Monty 845  20:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

New page patroll
Hi. I see you  just  patrolled Bill Moss,Jr.. Before passing any  more pages as patrolled, please take a moment  to  read up  on  WP:RS and WP:BIO. Part, just a small part,  of the work  of page patrolling  includes also checking  the refs for reliability. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Aw, thanks.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  19:57, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. Please note that we take very seriously our criteria on non-free image uploads and users who repeatedly upload or misuse non-free images may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. ΔT The only constant 17:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The next time you re-insert NFC into a list you will be blocked. ΔT The only constant 15:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's try and sort this out. It needs book covers to represent the books there. How can it be overuse? At one time, all those books were in seperate articles. But now they have all been merged together, and the picture stays with them. I think we should make an exception to the policy here, bucause it's only a book cover, per book, per section!  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesnt work that way. Please take the discussion to the talk page. ΔT The only constant 15:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think either of you should be edit-warring over the inclusion of these images, but Delta, aren't you currently under several restrictions based on past issues you've had with this topic? There is a current discussion Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Betacommand 2011 where I have mentioned your above threat to block.


 * Regarding the books images, I wonder if it would be possible to find, or take, an image that shows some, most or all of the books (all in one image), and that image could go at the top of the list? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

$\delta$'s removals are entirely appropriate and in compliance with WP:NFLISTS. Rcsprinter123, if you disagree with the removal engaging in discussion on the article's talk page is the way forward, not edit warring to your non-free content inclusive version. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You should consider that block threat as void, as it was issued without authority by an editor who is edit warring with you over a disputed interpretation of Wikipedia policy. However, edit warring is never good, even if you disagree with the other editor - so you can and will be blocked for edit warring if you revert again if not for image use violations.  The language in WP:NFLISTS is known as a "guideline", and couches things in non-mandatory terms: images should be used judiciously; some are preferable to others, pushing images out to the sub-articles and using an image that is representative are preferred, images used for visual identification should be used as sparingly as possible.  Frankly, I'd have to look into the matter to see whether Wikipedia practice disallows using multiple images for visual identification in this kind of article, as it is not immediately clear from the guideline page.  That's something that ought to be discussed, probably in a central location, because it affects a lot of different articles.  - Wikidemon (talk) 19:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It already has been discussed, and the WP:NFLISTS guideline was a result of that, with implementation being that bibliographies, videographies, discographies, character lists, etc. have been stripped of per-element images. This is standard practice. In this particular case, there's nothing stopping an editor from locating an image of the seven books in this series together and using that as a single image, rather than 7. Ref The Chronicles of Narnia, where we used to have individual book covers much like this article did. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:02, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

You may be interested in this AN3 report. <font face="Verdana" color="003B48" size="2px">Eagles  <font face="Verdana" color="003B48" size="2px">24/7  (C)  00:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Template parameters
How about taking all the s out of the template (maybe even going back to the original code minus ) and putting the s on the transclusion like ? —teb728 t c 11:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * A request for information at this point on the page about another user's location was suppressed (hidden from view), not because a request was made, but because a suggestion regarding the location was made. Using Wikipedia email might be better. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  11:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The new parameters work!  Rcsprinter  (talk)  11:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Jiggy McCue series.tiff
I appreciate your efforts on this image. However, it's not an acceptable use. Please see WP:NFLISTS #1. The problem in user created montages is that it does nothing to relieve the copyright burden. If I uploaded 12 images individually and posted them to the article, I would need 12 rationales to cover each use of each copyrighted item. If I instead create a montage of the same 12 images (as you did) I would still need 12 rationales to cover the use of the image. There's no reduction in copyright burden by merging all 12 images together into one; it's still effectively 12 images. File:Jiggy McCue books.jpg does not suffer such constraints. I've removed your user created montage, and replaced it with that image, tagging your montage as orphaned and disputed fair use. If you have questions, please ask. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll see what I can do.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  16:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Creating 12 rationales won't fix the problem though. Then, you've effectively got 12 non-free images in the article, failing WP:NFCC and WP:NFLISTS. The previous image was OK because it came from a single source (although one could argue it's a derivative work, but I don't think anyone's going to do that). Black Kite (t) (c) 19:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * So, what do I have to do?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  21:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * What has to be done is the user created montage needs to be deleted, and the single source montage needs to remain. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:Astray/testcases  Rcsprinter  (talk)  18:55, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

RENFE Class 350
Hello, removing fields from an infobox can be helpful if they are superfluous, but if they are not filled in due to absense of information and could be completed later then it is counter productive to remove them eg your edit - for example "length" "width" "fuelcap" are all fields that would be expected to be completed at some point.Imgaril (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Editing other's comments
Hi, it is generally considered bad ettiquette to edit others' comments as you did at User talk:Sitush. Good luck editing! Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * My semi-automated tool just does whatever. Should I set it not to do user talk pages?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You should be checking every spelling correction that you make with a tool like AWB. And yes, do not edit any talk pages. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! By the way, what script are you using? Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:59, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm using WP:LIVE SPELL. Just click and it does it.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Your edit
Hi. Could you explain this edit? First of, that IS a bot that uses AWB (just because it does not have a bot flag DOES NOT mean it is not a bot, some bots don't have a bot flag), if you look in the AWB checkpage (whether it's in the users or bots list), you will see the bot there, and the BRFA is shown here (even if if did not have a BRFA, those tags would still be appropriate, although for it to be identified as a bot, it would need at least one BRFA, whether the BRFA was approved or denied). Second of all, it is my alternate account, and you must let me know you made the edit first, because to edit that page, you need my permission first. Finally, remember not to make a point. Oh yes, and if it was not intended to be a bot, it would be blocked for violation of the username policy. Thanks. -Porch corpter (talk/contribs) 00:33, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw those things, looked at the user rights and it is not a bot. Plus it has only made one edit. I was just getting rid of the things on the userpage which might make people think it is a bot.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  08:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
&mdash; The Earwig   (talk)  20:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Bots
Hi Rcsprinter123, thanks for letting me know that Earwig is helping you out, I've seen some of their work and you've certainly got a very knowledgable bot worker there. Events have rather overtaken me as I've been snowed under since last Friday (sorry about that), so all I had time to do was to be coy about bots and suggest AWB. The fact is that I don't think a bot is right for you at all.

You have to ask yourself why you want a bot. I have a feeling that you're looking for status or a way to easily "improve" the encyclopedia without doing much work. I have to warn you that a bot is a lot of work, writing code, debugging, monitoring all takes a lot of time and skill - it's not nearly as easy as the computer scientists make it out to be unless you are one of them. Trust me, I know, I've worked in the industry for years and the best coders are the ones who do make it look effortless, and it takes a very long time and a lot of knowledge to get to that level.

It might be that you've got a great idea for work that needs to be done by a bot, and if you can explain it well, then a much better option is to ask a programmer to set their bot to do the work for you. If you're looking to learn about writing bots, then sure, learn away, write it in Perl or Python (or any other language). But don't forget you'll need to get it approved. As Earwig says, copyediting bots are not normally approved because they need to be watched by humans so they don't edit a quote or a template or something like that. Adding symbols would be much better done through something like AWB.

You've been very vague and handwavy when it comes to what you want to do with a bot, which is useless for any person who wants to write a bot. You've been lucky, Earwig would know what questions you'd need to answer to be able to program it, but he isn't going to do it for you - he's said that very specifically. You'll have to learn how to write code and do the vast majority of the work yourself. He may be helpful and review your code, see where it's going wrong, but that will only come once you've written it.

So, in summary, I think that your own personal bot is a bad idea unless you are looking to learn about programming. Spend some time reading up on AWB, talk to the person who declined you, explaining what you are planning to do with it and politely asking him to overturn it. AWB is the best option for you, in my opinion. <font color="#000">WormTT &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, will do.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, on the topic of AWB, it seems that you have been doing too many controversial thinks semi-automatically. The AWB is for non controversial actions. If you are willing to use it under supervision I will grant it to you. Your supervisor should be someone you like and trust that already uses AWB and so know the rules. Let me know when you have a supervisor that can check what you propose to do before you let loose with it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * When you say supervisor, do you mean mentor, like Worm (above)? If so, I'm just going to be doing cleanups and things so that I can have a bit of practice for my bot (also above).  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to be your supervisor as I'm already your mentor and have used AWB in the past, so I'd be willing to be a supervisor. However, Graeme might be looking for someone with a bit more experience than me. Also, I'm a little snowed under so I might not be particularly helpful for a few days... <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Feel free. What exactly is a supervisor?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it's similar to a mentor for AWB - you could run questions through me, let me know what you're planning to do before you do it and I'd keep an eye on your edits to make sure you're not blowing anything up. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. As an admin, can you grant me the permissions, then?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I could, but I feel uncomfortable doing it as your mentor. I'll have a word with Graeme to see what he thinks. <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, Worm That Turned would be a great person for this. I have now added Rcsprinter123 to the list. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  21:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Refim
I saw you created Template:Refim as a redirect to Template:Refimprove. After you used it in one article. This redirect wasn't really necessary, and the article now uses the full template name. Perhaps you'd consider recommending Refim for speedy deletion with Db-userreq? Debresser (talk) 14:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Is this post being noticed? Debresser (talk) 21:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, noticed. Don't want to Db-userreq though.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:11, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Added rail symbol...
Hey RCS....Why is the rail symbol added linking to Transport in London, regardless of location? doktorb wordsdeeds 19:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Which page were you thinking of?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  19:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps . Dartford is not in London. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Why are even considering adding this symbol. It does not anything the article. The station succession boxes already have the symbol, and the info boxes link to the relevant National Rail infomation providing the three letter station code is in the infobox. I have made similar comment on the Template talk:Infobox GB station, where you may wish to respond. --Stewart '''(talk 11:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Adding symbol
I see you are adding the code. It would be better to add it to a separate line. Debresser (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * AWB won't let me.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  14:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it will - I managed to when I was using AWB for star trek episodes, eg I just have to remember how... and I'm not really able to check as I'm at work. Perhaps leave a question at the AWB talk page how to include a carriage return?  <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I also think it is possible. I asked an expert to help you. Because it really should be on a separate line, like all parameters. Debresser (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. It's possible. As I understand you use F&R. Either experiment with Adbanced F&R or even better use the following custom module:

In general if you want to make mass edits always contact WP:BOTREQ before to ask for advice. You can add more infobox names in the list above separated by comma.-- Magioladitis (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Where should I put this code?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Tools->Make mocule. Replace content with code above, check "enabled" and close. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, please review WP:AWB rules of use particularly item 4:, and  have no effect and so fall within "inconsequential edits". The rate that you are working at sometimes as many as five or six per minute) may also fall within rule 2. Thanks. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:39, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Besides the issues Redrose raised, I think you've been doing an alright job with AWB. (Assuming there was consensus to add the images... but it appears good). Do try to be careful with "inconsequential edits" and make sure you're not getting to too high a speed - you're meant to check each edit before it accepts, you're still a person :) <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 19:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Hitler related
Template:Hitler related has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sir Armbrust <sup style="color:#E3A857;">Talk to me  <sub style="color:#008000;">Contribs  07:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

hasty templating
Hi there,

The template that you placed on User_talk:Nickciob was over-hasty IMHO: he's a new user who's doing good faith edits. Please be careful with templates - they have been identified as a major factor in chasing away potentially productive editors. --Slashme (talk) 17:54, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 09:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Bobs
Can you please tell me why you tagged my edits as vandalism on the article Bobs. I was reverting the edits made by 220.245.29.102 who changed the redirect to an article "Joxes" and I reverted it back to The Bobs (disambiguation)

You then marked my edits as vandalism and posted a warning on my talk page S PARKZY   09:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Igloo must have just reverted the latest revision which was you; I was trying to revert the IP.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  08:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Adoption
I would love to be adopted. I am very clueless as to what to do. Alpert1 (talk) 12:26, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you going to update it automatically, or do you wait for me to provide feedback? Alpert1 (talk) 23:42, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's just keep ourselves to that page, and you read it through. At the bottom, I ask for questions. You needn't keep coming here, that is our own talkpage now.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  12:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Rcsprinter123, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Rcsprinter123/Coastliner 700.


 * See a log of files removed today here.
 * Shut off the bot here.
 * Report errors here.
 * If you have any questions, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:03, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Rcsprinter123/Coastliner 700  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. 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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Other people's userpages.
I fully grant that you had the best of intentions in removing sensitive information from userpages. However, I recommend that in future, you instead bring such information to the attention of someone with oversight privileges (there is a mailing list to which oversight requests can be made).

I especially recommend that you use greater discretion in your choice of edit summary. Thank you. DS (talk) 15:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 08:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

E71 copyedit
Hi! I recently requested a peer review of the article and the reviewer pointed out that a copyedit would be necessary, so I'd like to thank you for copyediting the European route E71.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:55, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

hi I saw your message
yeah I'm fine with you moving it but could you just make a copy of it instead so the original can remain on my user page please i'd prefer it that way otherwise it will be a no but if you do it on those terms then I'll accept — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace10000 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  19:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Coastliner 700
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well done on your first DYK! <font color="#000">WormTT  &middot; &#32;(talk) 09:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Worm, and I hope there are many more to come!  Rcsprinter  (talk)  09:57, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

hi me again!
you know that userbox i said you could use could you go on my talk page for me and post a link on there please so i can see my now official work in all its glory, id be very grateful if you did. yours happily, Ace10000 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC).

ready
i'm ready for the next lesson obviously not the test though--Ace10000 (talk) 07:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Great, although please don-t keep coming here - keep all our discussion to the adoption page.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

ATC code N
Hi! Could you clarify this edit? I don't think there need to be any more links (it's a list linking to all of its sub-lists), and I don't see any need for wikification. Thanks, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point, I'll remove the tag. You can't see many links in an automated editor though.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  20:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All the links are in templates. I have removed the tag for now; but please feel free to suggest or implement more wikilinks. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Ace10000
I note your comments regarding this adoptee of yours; normally his last edit, which is clearly a disruptive threat, would qualify him for an indefblock, particularly as his edits to date have in any significant way enhanced the encyclopedia. I will send him a one-off warning, noting your concerns, but would feel a block mandatory if he does not provide a positive response.

I sympathise with your unfortunate choice of adoptees, but we can only do our best to help new editors who request it. Please do not take it personally.-- Anthony Bradbury <sup style="color:Black;">"talk" 16:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  18:53, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, it's possible to read the edit as meaning that he would make his own website better than Wikipedia and that thus Wikipedia would be knocked off its "top spot" as the world's favourite online encyclopedia. This wouldn't be a threat of disruption of such, more an amusing challenge :-) Admittedly, the wording, and thus the actual meaning, are rather unclear. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That is, in my view, an over-charitable interpretation. I will give him another day to respond - he has so far not done so. -- Anthony Bradbury <sup style="color:Black;">"talk" 16:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * By 'him', do you mean Ace1000? If so, I think he may have retired early as he is showing no signs of doing anything.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  16:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

American Airlines Flight 11
The actual time of the crash is on page 45 of this .pdf: http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=909256 which is also the cited source. Please do not revert (you are now at 4--have you read WP:3RR?) or claim vandalism where there is none. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.99.126 (talk) 14:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: YGM
Hey. I discussed it with my fellow Signpostians last night, and we'd be happy to publish a piece along the lines suggested. However, we do feel that it could benefit from a stronger narrative e.g. about whether the results were as expected, any changes from previous periods, etc. We're happy to help with that, of course. Two weeks should give us long enough to sort out the first report :) - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 08:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I suppose I could work some of that in to it. If it does get published, which section would it be in? The News and Notes, Technology, even Opinion, or will it get a special report section to itself? Thanks,  Rcsprinter  (talk)  09:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Depending on length, it would either get a special report, or it would be a section in F&A, I should think. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 09:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What's F&A? I can't find anything which might be that. I'm improving the article now.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  09:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you looked at my new version and decided yet?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  10:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, we didn't get a chance to look at this for last week's issue, but we'll try to get it into next week's in some form :) F&A is the Features ("Best of the Week") weekly report. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 20:31, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Which exact time period does it cover? I'm guessing it includes July given the appearance of Amy Winehouse on the list. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 19:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just around the general time of this year so far. I'm planning to do another one around about January or something.  Rcsprinter  (talk)  19:39, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

News and progress from RfA reform 2011
(You are receiving this message because you are either a task force member, or you have contributed to recent discussions on any of these pages.)

The number of nominations continues to nosedive seriously, according to  these monthly figures. We know why this is, and if the trend continues our reserve of active admins will soon be underwater. Wikipedia now needs suitable editors to come forward. This can only be achieved either through changes to the current system, a radical alternative, or by fiat from elsewhere.

A lot of work is constantly being done behind the scenes by the coordinators and task force members, such as monitoring the talk pages, discussing new ideas, organising  the project  pages, researching  statistics and keeping  them  up  to  date. You'll also see for example that  we have recently  made tables to  compare how other Wikipedias choose  their sysops, and some tools have been developed to more closely examine !voters' habits.

The purpose of WP:RFA2011 is to focus attention on  specific issues of our  admin  selection  process and to develop  RfC proposals for solutions to improve them. For this, we have organised the project into dedicated sections each with their own discussion pages. It is important to understand that  all Wikipedia policy changes take a long  time to implement whether or not the discussions appear to  be active - getting the proposals right before offering them for discussion by the broader community is crucial to the success of any RfC. Consider keeping the pages and their talk pages on your watchlist; do check out older threads before starting a new one on topics that have been discussed already, and if you start a new thread, please revisit it regularly to follow up on new comments.

The object of WP:RFA2011 is not  to make it  either  easier or harder to  become an admin -  those criteria are set by  those who  !vote at  each  RfA. By providing  a unique venue for developing ideas for  change independent  of  the general discussion  at  WT:RFA, the project has two  clearly  defined goals: The fastest way is through improvement to the current system. Workspace is however also available within the project  pages to  suggest  and discuss ideas that are not  strictly  within  the remit  of this project. Users are invited to make use of these pages where they  will  offer maximum exposure to  the broader community, rather than individual  projects in  user space.
 * 1) Improving the environment  that  surrounds RfA in  order to  encourage mature, experienced editors of the right  calibre to  come forward, pass the interview, and dedicate some of their  time to  admin  tasks.
 * 2) Discouraging, in the nicest  way  possible of course, those whose RfA will be obvious NOTNOW or SNOW, and to  guide them towards the advice pages.

We already know what's wrong with RfA - let's not clutter the project with perennial chat. RFA2011 is now ready to propose some of the elements of reform, and all the task force needs to do now is to pre-draft those proposals in the project's workspace, agree on the wording, and then offer them for central discussion where the entire Wikipedia community will be more than welcome to express their opinions in  order to  build consensus.

New tool Check your RfA !voting history! Since the editors' RfA !vote counter at X!-Tools has been down for a long while, we now have a new RfA Vote Counter to replace it. A significant improvement on the former tool, it provides a a complete breakdown of an editor's RfA votes, together with an analysis of the participant's voting pattern.

Are you ready to help? Although the main engine of RFA2011 is its task force, constructive comments from any  editors are always welcome on  the project's various talk  pages. The main reasons  why  WT:RfA was never successful in  getting  anything  done are that threads on different aspects of RfA are all mixed together, and are then archived where nobody  remembers them and where they  are hard to  find - the same is true of ad hoc threads on  the founder's talk  page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 16:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC).

Articles for deletion/Ginsberg's theorem
Hi Rcsprinter123. Please revert your closure of Articles for deletion/Ginsberg's theorem. The proponents of retention did not explain how the sources in the article constituted significant coverage as required by the GNG. Per Non-admin closure, "Outcomes of the discussion that require an evaluation of all of the arguments relative to the policies" should not be closed by non-admins. Please self-revert and relist the discussion so other editors can weigh in about the sources. Thanks, Goodvac (talk) 00:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Relisting debates
Debates like Articles for deletion/Kesgrave Hall School shouldn't be relisted by a non-administrator in a controversal AFD such as that one. There is such thing as a no-consensus AFD. The only AFDs that usually get relisted are ones with one or two comments, or ones with absolutely no policy based comments, which this AFD doesn't qualify. I was a former adminstrator with four years of closing AFD debates, I should know. Thanks Secret account 18:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to avoid any potential confusion... don't close them as No Concensus either. Leave closing of controversial or contentious AfDs to administrators. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Opps forgot to mention don't close them as no consensus neither though u were kinda warned above. Secret account 19:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Buffalo City FC
May I ask why you relisted this? It's not exactly short of arguments. And in fact, is there a particular reason you're relisting things as a non-admin anyway? I don't see anything in WP:NAC regarding relisting. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I relisted it because there had been two delete and two keep votes since the last relist. Arguments were all the same too. And who said non-admins can't relist? Aren't we allowed to do anything except vote?  Rcsprinter  (talk)  15:05, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Firstly, it's not a vote. Secondly, non-admins are trusted with a limited set of defined responsibilies per WP:NAC because these are low-impact and don't require the community to have invested the trust of the mop to editors to deal with. Relisting is not one of them, as it's far too much of a judgement call: additionally, relisting is usually for cases where there has been insufficient input, and that wasn't the case here. IMO you should have left that to an admin to close. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)