User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 6

Thanks!
Thanks for the help. It was my first article nomination, and I guess I messed it up a little. Take care! Olderon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Eh, it happens. I try not to remember the first time I tried to nominate something. It was a nightmare, as the process is pretty difficult to understand at first. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You're awesome.
Just wanted to say hello and give you some kudos since in my very short tenure editing you've happened to show up to help twice. Marla Mason and Cal Leandros are pleased too, I'm sure. And if you can think of any other urban fantasy or etc. pages that could use some help, let me know. Caseylf (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Nitram Charcoal Page
Hi, I am attempting to make a Wikipedia page for Nitram Fine Art Charcoal - an artist charcoal that was originally created in 1965. I've had the page removed twice, however Peridon mentioned you might be able to help as you were credited as a great reference digger and article rescuer. I've read through several references on how to create a page and what constitutes a notable company and I believe that Nitram Fine Art Charcoal does meet that criteria (it is well regarded in art circles).

The page is located here and I have attempted to pull references from people in the art community. I would be really appreciative of any insight you could provide and would happily remove anything that appears promotions. My original template was Winsor and Newton

Thank you for your time, Christina  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christina119 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

useful references
Hi..recently you removed some references from Lucky Di Unlucky Story saying that these are not useful references. So how one should decide which reference is useful. Vigyani (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the sources for various reasons.Full On Punjabi and Punjabi Mania both looked to be one of those blogs that although relatively long running, isn't considered to be a reliable source per Wikipedia's rules. It takes an awful lot for any blog to be considered usable, with the exception to this rule being that it can be used if it's written by someone who is considered to be an absolute authority. By this I mean that the person is someone such as a noted educator in the field (professor of film, etc) or is a noted professional such as the editor for a notable paper or a noted film director. Most blogs, no matter how good they may seem or how long they have been running, meet this guideline. It's frustrating as I've seen several blogs cover various subjects in more depth than some of the official RS, yet not get considered a reliable source despite them being rather respected within their field. Some of the other blogs, such as this one are absolutely unusable as a source under this rule and doesn't look to even come close to being a RS. Part of the reason behind the stiff rule for blogs is that blogs are so easy to create, so the reliability of any given blog is suspect. I was able to use Cine Punjab as a trivial source, but that's all it can be since it only gives the basic info of the film. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:59, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flower in a Storm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Superpowers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby
Wanted to tell you, very nice work cleaning up and expanding The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby! :) By the way, if you are interested in film-related articles, I hope you'll check out WT:FILM. We are fairly active there. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 14:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Turkish article help
Hi! I speak Turkish and English too. What would you need help with exactly? Kind regards, 小龙 (Timish) # xiǎolóng de xìnxiāng  18:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi! A checked the sources and I think they are OK, they are daily online newspapers from Turkey/Cyprus. Notability is definitely established, since the movie was screened at national festivals. I expanded a bit based on what I found in the already existing sources. I removed the sales guy's name, that was like direct advertisement :D I left a message to the Turkish contributor on his talk page in Turkish. I hope this helps. 小龙 (Timish) # xiǎolóng de xìnxiāng  15:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I do think that the guy has good intentions, but that the language barrier kept the two of us from really meeting eye to eye when it came to explaining why I'd taken some of the stuff off the page, such as information that was already in the infobox and info such as the sales guy's name. Thank you!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Finale Fitzpatrick Hush Hush 4.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Finale Fitzpatrick Hush Hush 4.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for editing
Hi Tokyogirl79, thanks for adding more information to the article "Other Worlds" book about the Lohorung community of Nepal. Are you from Tokyo ? Ashishlohorung (talk) 02:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Nah, just an Ace of Base fan. :) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nancy Drew on Campus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drug usage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Sig
Hi,Tokyogirl79. FYI: It looks as though you may have forgotten to sign your comment here. Cheers! Location (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Reference Sourcing
Hi! You've been recommended to me as a great sourcer of references. Would you be able to assist me, please? My article is Folly Wildlife Rescue Trust. Many thanks in advance. Nunnsofunky (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not as good with organizations as I am with movies and books, but I'll give it a whirl.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I wasn't able to find anything, but I did recommend that it get userfied.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:EntityPoster2013Film.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:EntityPoster2013Film.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:51, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Girlfriend, Boyfriend, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aggregator (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

nick sand page
Hi Tokyo girl, thanks for fixing up the nick sand page. --Nick Sand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.25.195.169 (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rain On The Just, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ancestral home (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The Wolfen
Are you the person who added the plot synopsis for that book? If so, it appears you left a portion of it out.ZFT (talk) 18:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I put part of it in, but not all of it. I've been meaning to go back and edit it. My biggest problem is that I haven't actually read the book, so I'm going mostly by what I can scrounge off the internet.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   18:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

A Tale of Two
Hello Tokyogirl79. Good catch. I missed that. Thank you. The author is Ethan Farmer, but it doesn't help in searching :( --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 10:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Invite
Hey I just noticed you like sailor moon and was wondering if you would like to join the Anime and Manga wikiproject, some extra help would be useful =). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:51, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:BeautifulCreaturesMoviePoster1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:BeautifulCreaturesMoviePoster1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Expanding Boudreaux's Butt Paste
Nice job. The article is just 1-2 sentences short of being applicable for a DYK by itself, as a 5x expansion :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

NOS4A2
Can I restart the article? The novel is coming out next month, early copies of the novel are already available and Subterranean Press is releasing a limited edition.--CyberGhostface (talk) 23:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think so- I see where it already has two reviews, one from the LJ and one from Locus.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:11, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Applaud your good work on Bend, Not Break, A kitten for you!
Tokyogirl97, your recent editing work on Bend,Not Break is very impressive, helps a lot with a neutral tone on the controversy of this book.

Hope you love the kitten I chose for you! I am a cat lover :))

Count on you (talk) 08:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC) 
 * KITTEH!!! (Cuddles instantly) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ha! I came here with the same impression. It's good to see competent and creative editors like you, Tokyogirl :) --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 11:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Excellent job in improving the original posting of BEND, NOT BREAK
Dear Tokyogirl79,

You have done an excellent job in improving the original posting of BEND, NOT BREAK entry in Wikipedia.

Be persistent. Continue to exercise your First Amendment freedom of speech. Focus on how much progress all of you have made toward discovering the unvarnished truth in the past 30 days. If you consistently make progress toward fact finding, the unvarnished reality is likely to prevail over the romanticized stories.

Have faith in American democracy. Truth-finding can be a long journey. While the Battle of Bunker Hill was an initial victory for King George III, American colonists eventually won the War of Independence. British mercenaries fought because they were paid; American colonists defended this New World because it is their homeland. Good triumphs over evil, eventually. It takes time, patience and proactive efforts to debunk falsehood, but truth usually prevails in the long run. Eventually, Ping Fu, Sir Harold Evans, Van Harris Art et al. will make their amends, voluntarily.

As a suggestion, you might want to add DEBUNKING BEND, NOT BREAK website as an external link to WIKIPEDIA’s entry on BEND, NOT BREAK. Visitors to Wikipedia can choose for themselves whether they prefer to read the romanticized version, the unvarnished reality, or both.

William Lee Poy’s article represents the Asian American point of view. His article is understandable to most good-natured Americans. You might want to add William Lee Poy’s article as a reference in Wikipedia’s entry for BEND, NOT BREAK.

Look forward to finding the truth surrounding BEND, NOT BREAK by visiting its WIKIPEDIA entry 12 months from now.

Best wishes,

Albert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romantic Realist (talk • contribs) 17:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Tokyogirl79 -- Since Albert has outed himself, I can now say this without violating WP:PRIVACY - He's one of the "truth seekers" who have been harassing Ping Fu. You're a real "hit" with them. They say you came to their rescue. Here's a link to the messages about you:  Just thought you ought to know. VanHarrisArt (talk) 04:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This in itself is on the right tracks to a Humour Barnstar in my book. MIVP - (Can I Help?) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 18:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, I don't think anything other than the official publisher/author website should be added to the external links section, given how heated the subject matter. I don't think that the debunking website would be appropriate.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   18:41, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Tokyogirl79 I would like to argue the importance of including Ping Fu's Chinese memoir in this page. If Ping Fu herself passed the threshold of noteworthiness to merit a wikipedia entry, so should the major works of her life. A memoir by no means a small undertaking, and ignoring it is cherry picking at best for the purpose of narrating her life. To argue that the book was published by a Chinese publisher does not make it any less important, given the fact that there are far fewer publishing houses in China than US, and a publisher with a readership of 13 billion cannot be ignored. To argue that book was written in Chinese and hence should not be in an English wikipedia page is also a bad argument. With that logic, all major publications by Einstein also should not qualify them in Wikipedia because they were written in German. Using Language as an excuse is simply separating the world rather than bring people together. I don't think this is wikipedia policy, but I have not checked. There should be plenty of Chinese speaking editors on Wikipedia, please consult them when deciding on the fairness of any translations. A final note, you might have noticed that only Ping Fu "supporters" are against including this work into her wikipedia entry. Is there anything they want to hide? Annchomski (talk) 16:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)AnnChomski

Imputing Motive and Intent
I'm bringing this to your user page, because we don't need more noise in Talk:Bend, Not Break.

Here are some of the things you've written about me:


 * I'll openly say it: I think that he's cherrypicking exact phrases and words in order to skew the description of the book and its controversy in favor of Ping Fu and I've said as much on the talk page.

I have to say, you seem awfully bent on having a very specific outlook on this entire scenario and you're twisting a lot of words around to mean very specific things, such as the word "critics". A lot of your suggestions seem a little WP:POINT-y and come across as sort of pro-Ping Fu and anti-critics. Trying to cherry-pick phrases to suit your needs rather than using the colloquial terms is just as much of a bias and misrepresentation as if I were to have written the article to be anti-Ping Fu.


 * I don't want to drag this into here, but it's basically the other editor assuming that "critic" equals out to "reviewer". I'm somewhat concerned over the cherrypicking of what terms are or aren't acceptable, as I feel that splitting hairs in this manner is somewhat WP:POINTy.


 * I'm still concerned over your motivation here. Most of your arguments stem from you wanting to keep all of the information in one tiny section and to keep it to very strict content. It's almost censorship in my opinion. I'm not saying that you are trying to apply some broad brush to everything and to make Fu appear like some Innocent Ingrid, but I don't like that your main argument is "but this will just spur on her haters and it could turn into an attack page"... Heck, I'll just outright say it: I think that you're trying to re-write the article for the book and the section in Fu's article to suit your own personal agenda. It's noble that you want to defend Fu against some pretty nasty people, but that's not what Wikipedia is for. We're not a place for you to White Knight.


 * I feel that this is a case of misguided White Knighting on the other editor's behalf.

That's five separate and distinct instances where you've NOT assumed good faith on my part, and have rather imputed motive and intent to me. I do not consider that these have risen to WP:personal attacks, but they are definitely ad hominem arguments.

I am going to, again, and for the third time, ask you to assume good faith. If you can't understand how the above statements are offensive, we can certainly escalate this through the dispute resolution process. My feelings won't be hurt if that's what you want to do. But I wanted to start here, before escalating, as that is WP:DR protocol.

(side note: Please don't bypass DR protocol. A bunch of wikipedians spent their good time on the AfD, only to have it procedurally closed.)

(Another note: Your comments to me are providing great amusement for the "truth seekers", who are copying and reposting them on Amazon.) VanHarrisArt (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I just feel that your arguments predominantly stem from you trying to protect Ping Fu from further attacks. You say that the attacks are against Fu, but the thing is that they all come from the fact that she wrote this book. You say that the article is not neutral, but then you fail to actually bring up any examples or provide any suggestions as to how it can be changed. Your reaction is pretty much to remove everything and redirect to her article, essentially "deleting" the article and putting what can be mentioned or added under extremely strict control that has to be met per your guidelines. Guidelines that you've never really clearly stated. I honestly don't know how to progress without first outright stating that I think that you're trying to use Wikipedia as a way of protecting/White Knighting for Fu because you're afraid that people on other sites might misquote Wikipedia as a way to further harm her. We can't cover everything with pillows and write everything down to where nobody can take anything away from it other than one specific viewpoint. I view that as borderline censorship and it doesn't do anything to help anyone. If anything, it shows that we're being biased by selectively picking how much we cover something because we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or egg anyone on. I understand that we have to be careful in how we phrase things because bullies on the Internet will probably take things out of context, but that does not mean that we should avoid discussing it in the detail it deserves out of a noble but ultimately misguided attempt to keep people from talking on other sites. That talk is going to happen regardless and in my experience I've found that trying to repress information to a select and specific viewpoint often makes things worse rather than better. Want to help improve the page? Give us alternatives rather than "let's direct this to Ping Fu and only include what I personally think is OK and is vetted by me". Work with us, not against us. Why not use your sandbox or userspace to write up an alternative version of the controversy and content to put in the article? Or if you've read the book in its entirety, re-write the synopsis section to be more accurate rather than complaining that it's all wrong? If you want to compare the alleged inconsistencies with the rationales given by Fu, then please do so. (Use the userspace/sandbox first to make a test edit because it'd help to have a place to work and streamline everything first before posting it in the article, as you're afraid of people going to various locations and using it against you and Fu.) But saying "no, this can't exist because I say so and because there are bullies out there" isn't a very good excuse for redirection. The people are focusing on Fu, yes, but this focus comes from the book itself and the claims of inaccuracy in the book. It's entirely appropriate for this to exist.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   02:14, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go sentence by sentence, because otherwise, my response is going to be a mess.
 * Your first sentence is ad hominem.
 * You're Denying the antecedent.
 * In this diff  I cite an example.
 * I suggested no such thing; Please show me a diff where you think I did.
 * Here is a diff where I cited WP guidelines that are perfectly acceptable to me.
 * This sentence is ad hominem too.
 * I have not suggested this; if you think I have, show me a diff, and we can discuss it.
 * I haven't hinted at anything more than being responsive to existing policy--and certainly not censorship; again, if you think I have, show me a diff.
 * That's a non-sequitor.
 * This is a strawman argument.
 * First, I had to know whether there was going to even be a page.
 * If you can provide a diff where I have written, or even suggested, what you quoted here, then do so. Making up a false quote to malign another is exactly the sort of incivility that constitutes a personal attack.
 * Again, please don't suggest that I'm working against WP, unless you can provide a diff with strong evidence to support the claim.
 * What controversy are you talking about? There are at least four distinct ones related to what we've been talking about.
 * You wrote the synopsis and left out the citations. I was hoping you could put them in, so I could do a cite-check. Or maybe just explain, given your experience as an editor, why you would leave out citations on an article that you stubbed for POV?
 * I'm not here to defend Ping Fu.
 * By saying "you're afraid..." you're making an ad hominem remark, and you're again implying that I'm here to protect Ping Fu above Wikipedia.
 * And, again, you're using a false quote. If I wrote such a thing, provide a diff. If not, retract it.
 * You're pushing POV. There are RS citations that contradict your claim.
 * I agree it is appropriate for the article to exist -- within the scope of WikiProject Books.
 * I don't mind if you yell at me or call me names, but if you continue to publish ad hominem remarks that characterize my motives or intents, without substantial evidence, I will push the issue all the way to arbitration. I don't mind this kind of nonsense from newbies, but I'm not willing to accept it from a person who's just been asked to be an administrator. We can settle this now, if you'll agree to assume good faith and interact with me with civility. Otherwise, our next step is WP:third opinion.

VanHarrisArt (talk) 09:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just offering an unsolicited third opinion as a WP:Wikijaguar who has had zero involvement with the Ping Fu thing (until now) - other than quietly observing all the discussion on this page (and raising an eyebrow over the Amazon links...) it strikes me that Tokyogirl has been acting with the utmost (and very characteristic) civility and objectivity in what is obviously an extremely emotive and intense scenario, so I find your claims that she has not been assuming good faith or interacting with you civilly quite surprising. Mabalu (talk) 10:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I think I'll bring this up on the admin board because I don't want this to get nastier than it is. I don't think either side is really getting nasty per se, but I think it's getting there. Especially since nothing is getting accomplished. I just have to say that I echo the earlier sentiment that if you want to have something changed, suggest an actual rewrite on the talk page. Write your own version of the controversy and reception section in your userspace or in your sandbox, then link to it on the talk page as an example. You complain that the talk page is biased and that it's pretty much just cannon fodder for the Internet bullies, but you do very little to actually give viable alternatives. You just tell me that the page is wrong and say that it's going to give the bullies more to arm themselves with. That's not finding a solution, that's perpetuating this argument. If anything is going to bring bullies to the boards to stir up trouble, it's things like this, where we're doing nothing but butting heads and splitting hairs without actually finding solutions. I've rewritten the argument and I've tried to re-write it to be more encompassing of the situation. You aren't really giving me much to really go on. You tell me that what I'm doing is well, pretty much wrong. No, you're not saying that precisely, but you're essentially saying this by way of saying that the page wasn't neutral enough, that things needed to be changed without giving alternatives, and by saying that the page will only encourage bullying. I'm bringing this up to the admin board as a way of trying to diffuse the situation before it escalates any further. This has long past the point of ridiculousness.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   14:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Adminship
Hi Tokyogirl! I see that you were asked this last year, but I think it's about time you were asked again - would you be interested in running for adminship? I think you would pass RfA with flying colours. Best — Mr. Stradivarius on tour  ♪ talk ♪ 05:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * So, how about it? :) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Persistent, isn't he? Mind you, he has a point - you've been on my potential admins list for ages. If you want to start getting ready, or need a nominator, I don't think you'll be short of offers. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  11:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * LOL, I might do it just to get you guys off my back! (Just kidding!) I don't know how active I'd really be as far as admin duties go, but I'm starting to see how it could be useful for small custodial duties.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep at it, Strad, her resolve is wavering... Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  11:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There's no need to be massively active in admin duties - if you use the tools to close the occasional AfD and perform the occasional move over a redirect, that would be an excellent reason to give you the tools. Go on, you know you want to. :) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 13:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * One of us, one of us, gobble gobble... Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Alright. I give. I'll do it. I'm tired of having to write "non-admin closure" in the AfD pages for things that are procedural keeps.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   07:34, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay! I'm glad we pulled you round. ;) I'm on my way out now, so I'll do the paperwork for you tomorrow. Maybe it will be a good hangover cure? — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 10:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Have one for me- I'm at work!!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:02, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Morning! It turns out the hangover isn't as bad as I was expecting, thankfully. :) There are a couple of things that you need to do before I nominate you, if that's ok with you. First thing, could you opt yourself into X!'s edit counter? You can do this by turning User:Tokyogirl79/EditCounterOptIn.js into a blue link (with any content), or you can do it for all Wikimedia wikis by creating m:User:Tokyogirl79/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js. Which brings me to the second point, which is optional but highly recommended - could you create a unified login for all Wikimedia wikis by going to Special:MergeAccount? I think this is a necessary prerequisite for turning on the edit counter across all wikis as well. Leave a message here when you're done, and we can get on with the nomination proper. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 01:44, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Done!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to stick my nose in, but I wish you the best of luck. You have my support! TB  randley  (review) 04:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, Requests for adminship/Tokyogirl79 is now a blue link! The next step is for you to read Guide to requests for adminship and Advice for RfA candidates. If you are sure that you would like to go ahead with your nomination, you should then accept your nomination and answer the three standard questions. If you would like any co-nominators (Yunshui?) then now is the time to ask them to write a nomination statement. Once everything on your nomination page is to your liking, let me know and I will transclude the page onto the main WP:RFA page so that people can start commenting. During the process you might also find the following links to be useful: Administrators' how-to guide, Administrators' reading list, and RfA cheatsheet. Let me know if you have any questions about the process, and best of luck! — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 06:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I would gladly do a co-nomination within a few hours. Secret account 14:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   14:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm writing a rather lengthy co-nomination, as I had this RFA watchlisted for a while now. It should be ready in about an hour or so, and then it is set to go. Secret account 17:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Co-nom done, it's ready to go. Secret account 19:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's an impressive nomination statement, thanks. :) Ok, Tokyogirl, all you have to do now is accept the nomination and we can get started. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour  ♪ talk ♪ 00:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

– Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 10:04 am, Today (UTC+0)
 * Done! Thanks guys! I completely forgot to do that when I did the questions!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Dammit, all the good stuff happens when I'm offline! You're pretty much sorted, but if you'd like the additional bolster of a third nomination (I promise it'll be shorter than Secret's), I think you know I'd be happy to oblige - just say the word. Otherwise, Strong support, and I'll see you in the admin lounge in a week. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  07:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, that's one of the best answers to Q3 I think I've ever seen. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  08:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (blushes) Thanks! I figured that everyone has gotten into arguments and if there's one thing that various people have told me on here, it's better to walk away from an argument if you think you're getting too heated and you know other people have it covered. At that point I wasn't really being any bit of helpful and might stand in the way of others with clearer viewpoints at that stage.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry Yunshui, I started the party without you. :) Good luck Tokyogirl! — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 08:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your doing great at requests for adminship so far, Tokyogirl. Supports are just occurring one after the other! TB  randley  (review) 00:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I added this earlier today: Yes! A dedicated editor, with a clear head and a caring nature. Will be a great addition to the ranks of administrators –

A barnstar for your work on Bend, Not Break!
Tokyogirl79:

Your kitten and your Defender of the Wiki Barnstar came from a WP:SPA created 2 days ago, apparently just for this purpose. I won't deny you deserve the Barnstar... but bribing you with a kitten shows they'll stop at nothing! What's next? Virtual chocolate? A picture of a rare Sailor Moon doll set? VanHarrisArt (talk) 09:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

A rare Sailor Moon (faced) Doll set for you!
Couldn't find any Sailor Moon dolls on free use image, so hope some rare sailor moon(-faced) dolls will be close enough... ;) Mabalu (talk) 12:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Rashmi Singh (author)

 * Dear Tokyo girl. I have returned after long.

Can you please check the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ananyaprasad/Rashmi_Singh and guide me about it Ananyaprasad (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Should Your RFA be Successful, Please Review my Block
Hey Tokyogirl. I am also a fan of B-rate horror movies. I recently was overcome with awe by the A-rate "Sinister" though. I really liked "Apollo 18," I'd suppose that one is B-rate. I've got the DVD for "Phone" here to be watched, spent way too much on Amazon.com for it. I was thinking it was Japanese, but no it's South Korean. I've been wanting to get "Cannibal Holocaust," which is purportedly the first in the "found-footage" genre, which also really interests me. Anyhow I chanced on your RFA, and saw the universal support you're getting so far. So I thought, well, why not her? I was falsely blocked for sockpuppetry by "Timotheus Canens" (his userpage here) in May last year. Yes, I will call it "false" because it impugns my honesty, as socks are deceptive, and he has never explained his allegation despite ample opportunity, which could possibly indicate good faith mistake. I edited Wikipedia for years but did a WP:CLEANSTART because of an outing. You can see my first edit explaining this: here. I really feel that he just got irritated, while hanging out on IRC as his talkpage and that of UltraExactZZ who went on to block my talkpage say they do, and that he blocked me cat and mouse in anticipation that I would revert to my old account and then he could have a look at that. Well, I am not going to type a novel here at your talkpage, I've explained this stuff in detail that you'll probably find if you research it a bit. I do need to mention that I did appeal to ArbCom, who declined without explanation, but I am informed with ArbCom-level reliability that that does not make it an "ArbCom block." As well, I acknowledge that I slipped on WP:CIV, so I am far from perfect. I am saying that I did not sock, and should not be blocked for that. This is Colton Cosmic, hope you can help me out. PS: I need to give you fair warning that I have studied Timotheus Canens a bit, and he has visceral reactions when his administrative actions are overturned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.160.66 (talk) 14:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, sounds like something I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole, given the commentry at User talk:Colton Cosmic. Dear IP, six months without sockpuppetry and an appeal to ArbCom is the minimum you need to do to get unblocked - anything less than that just isn't going to work, I'm afraid. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 15:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, please make your first act as an admin a unilateral unblock of Colton Cosmic. Trust me, that'll go down brilliantly with the rest of the admin corp. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  15:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. I'll be completely honest and say that I probably won't do any unblocking of any users for at least a good 3-6 months if I get approved as an admin. That's an area I have little experience in and I wouldn't feel comfortable making a decision on something I was so new at. Also, given that I have no prior knowledge of your situation and given the warnings by Strad and Yunshui, I don't think it would be very appropriate for me to overturn something in these circumstances.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I also want to say that even if I did undo the block, which I'm not, from what I can see on the page in question it looks like you would be blocked again fairly quickly and any decision I made get overturned as a rookie mistake. I'm really the wrong person entirely to request this of.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:42, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Dear IP, requesting an editor to unblock if they become a new administrator because they would be rookie does not seem appropriate, in my opinion. Besides, your talk page is full of valid reasons why you should not be unblocked yet, but if you really feel just you need to make a request, follow Stradivarius' advice. TB  randley  (review) 00:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll ignore those who butted in uninvited on the conversation until such time as they say "excuse me, but may I add" or similar, because they were rude. I'll let slip that TBrandley's "because they would be rookie" is not really accurate. Maybe yeah a new admin would be untainted by the group behavior that affects a lot of them, but it's more not knowing where else to turn. It's not like I'm sitting here preying on virgins. ;) Tokyogirl79, that's fair enough that you want to wait a few months. It's true there's plenty of critics and adversaries at my page. It's a zoo really. Yunshui has been going at me for months, now he wants to do an "SA" on me, I don't know what that is, so he has the upper hand there. He's lining up with Beeblebrox to do that against me now. Note that Mr. Stradivarius and Yunshui warn you but they didn't tell you what I did. It's more "just look at his talkpage, everybody hates him. Don't help him because we'll make you an outcast too." You didn't read at my talkpage evidence why I'm blocked. I know because I've never read that there either. I think in an optimal Wiki world, an admin would be able to say "okay, well X has asked me to unblock him, so step #1 let me go and see what he did to get blocked" and be able to find that. In my case "Timotheus Canens" rawly asserts I socked but it's not true, and where is the evidence? There's plenty others there chant "sock, sock, sock" it's a swell personal attack, but there is no evidence. They will never be able to prove it because it is not true. Anyhow, I don't fault your response, Tokyogirl79. My case is pretty tiresome, but you can also learn about bad blocks by looking at ArkRe (he just didn't do it) and Youreallycan (fine Wikipedia editor, protector of BLPs, just said sth stupid, shouldn't be banished). Best wishes and good luck. This is Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.191.170 (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Admitting you're a sock of a blocked user is not going to get you off the hook. It's just going to mean you get blocked for even longer. Like everyone said further up, take a break from editing entirely, and don't sock at all, then come back and accept the standard offer. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   12:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Ritchie333, I'm a sock no more than you'd be if you had to edit via IP. You really have no clue about my case. I'm saying I didn't do what I'm blocked for. Wikipedia was my hobby for several years, no real problems or strife. It was when I did WP:CLEANSTART that the whole deranged and dysfunctional inhabitants WP:ANI and satellites caused my situation. Bowing down for six months to smug individuals who know I didn't do it is only going to result in their increased glee at day 151 when they tell me to bow a little lower and maybe they'll consider it next time. Tokyo, I am sorry to put this on your page, he or whoever can have the last word after this. Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.47.153 (talk) 19:05, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Yay
Here's hoping that RFA goes well. No one deserves it more than you! § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:40, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Best of luck with your RfA. I find myself intermittently singing your praises, so it deserves to succeed. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   12:05, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Just adding another voice of agreement to the above. Mabalu (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Db Tag
Heya, just letting you know I fixed the db template tag you tried to place on IKEA Monkey. -XapApp (talk) 09:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The article got deleted, in case you're wondering what exactly fixed; You typed {db-G4}} . I fixed it to . XapApp (talk) 05:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah! I do that all the time. :( Thanks for seeing that and fixing it! I'm sort of clumsy with the keyboard and missed that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Two words for you: install Twinkle. Solves the problem of typos in manual tagging instantly, speeds up the whole process and has a number of useful admin-only buttons that you'll find invaluable in, what is it, a couple of days now? I've got a crib sheet here if you want to know the basics. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  21:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll definitely have to look at that- I've heard of Twinkle but never really got around to learning how to use it.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also an articles for deletion closure script you may like as well, would make things easier for you. TB  randley  (review) 04:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
The kitten ish wishing u luck on your Adminship =3.

Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC) 

Hi There
Thanks really for saving my article Other Worlds. I really appreciate that. :-) Ashishlohorung (talk) 05:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding text originally posted &#32;on User:Tokyogirl79&#32;([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tokyogirl79&diff=prev&oldid=537212836 diff])
 * It's no problem- I love saving the academic texts when I can because they can be so challenging to find sources for. They're not as mainstream as say, a book by Dan Brown, so they won't get covered as easily. It does usually mean that when I find a source it's usually a really good one. :) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:56, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Tokyogirl79; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

When God Writes Your Love Story
Hi Tokyo Girl,

I noticed that you proposed When God Writes Your Love Story for deletion and an administrator subsequently deleted the article. I have found sufficient sources to demonstrate notability, so I have recreated the article. If you decide to put the article up for an AfD, I would be grateful if you would let me know.

Neelix (talk) 00:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations are in order
Well, perhaps not yet, but I don't really expect a slew of several hundred pile-on opposes in the next few hours. So premature congratulations! Welcome to adminhood, and thanks for taking up the mop of unrewarding slog and personal abuse; many hands make light work (or at least make less of a mess). Best of luck! Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  19:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll try to do well! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   20:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * My congratulations as well Tokyogirl79 :) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 08:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've always thought you would make a good admin, and I'm really glad you took the plunge. I've noticed you around since we both started many years ago, so I'm convinced you will do good things around here, just as you always have.  Congrats, and thanks for taking up the mop. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 10:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Your Request for Adminship was successful
Congratulations, I have closed your Request for Adminship as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 10:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Congrats Tokyogirl! I knew that you wouldn't have any problems. :) — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 10:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats and Best Wishes.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations - I hope you'll believe that I mean this whole-heartedly. You handled the RFA exceedingly well; I was particularly impressed by your self-effacing answer to Q#7.  You clearly have integrity and humility.  Cheers!  -- Scray (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats, I knew you could do it. I'm always available if you have any questions about the new buttons.  <span style="font:small-caps 1.2em Garamond,Times,serif;color:#224422;letter-spacing:0.2em;">‑Scottywong <span style="font:0.75em Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;color:#444444;">| chatter _  14:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations!! Well deserved. Mabalu (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Nicely done! ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 15:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats as well, I knew your RFA would be a breeze. If you need any advise, you know where to turn to. Secret account 15:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, wish you all the best with the new tools. T4B (talk) 15:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh I'll definitely need all the help I can get. It'll just take a while to sink in that I can do more now than I did in the past. However because I can get so verbose, I'll probably stay away from ANI for a while until I can get that under control. That seemed to be the biggest issue with the oppose votes, so it's something I need to work on.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congradulations from me also. Regarding your 'verboseness' I wouldn't worry about it too much. Although a wall of text can be overwhelming it's nice to see people taking the time to detail their thoughts on an issue. Perhaps consider, before hitting 'save page' reading it over and distilling long paragraphs down to half their length by removing things you've already said. I find that I tend to repeat myself without realising and a cursory glance over it can be enough to remove quite a lot of waffle. Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 09:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've been thinking about making a page for the explanations I usually tend to do, then linking to that whenever I think I might go into a long saga about this or that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Well done! – Gareth Griffith-Jones   – The Welsh  Buzzard''  – 16:24, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Congrats from me too - that was a pretty impressive RfA! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well done, and well deserved! Details about the secret handshake and the nuclear codes should be on their way.  --j⚛e deckertalk 18:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, may you be the non-partial umpire that I believe you could be.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats! § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support as per above. Congrats! UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well done! I know you'll be great. Mkdw talk 21:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Good Luck - you'll need it. Have a view of What you won't learn in new admin school - so very true sometimes...  Ron h jones  (Talk) 22:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! You'll be a great admin. Well done! Stalwart 111  04:36, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Good luck and have fun! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 12:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the mop closet.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats! And don't let adminship be a distraction from editing. The project wants content. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 08:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Quick Reply - GGaR
First off, congratulations on becoming an Admin. Second, thank you for the quick reply, as well as your suggestions for improvement. I have dealt with Admins on other sites, and it is nice to see one as friendly, helpful, and encouraging as you. Keep up the good work! CountGrey (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for help
Thanks for help on rfd of Stress test. Rick (talk) 04:44, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem- it's one of those really strange deletions that don't really fit any one particular category especially well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion Spam
Can you look at this [] and give a comment? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the formatting help!
Hey Tokyogirl79,

Thanks for the formatting help. I did a bunch of digging around to follow the correct policies for nominating an article for deletion, but i was having a heck of a time figuring out which pages i needed to edit where and with which macros! I definitely appreciate the help (and if you have any pointers for where i can read up on more i'd appreciate that too!

Knowtheory (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm... The basics for this are at WP:AFD, but further down the page and somewhat easy to miss. Another good place to look for deletion templates are at WP:PROD and WP:SPEEDY. Once you know where they are on the page they're easier to get to, but it's a little weird getting used to them. It might actually be a good idea to create a little subpage in your userspace with links to the specific sections of things you use often. I've been thinking about doing that myself for when I'm editing in locations that I can't download software for. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Arin Hanson
The article was changed greatly from the time you commented. Please judge it as now. Note the number of interviews he has done in reliable sources. Please join the undelete discussion. Deletion review/Log/2013 March 25  D r e a m Focus  22:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: User:Hmh12345
I'm not sure why you reported this person on AIV, but his contribs show he hasn't edited since 2009 -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 08:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah- I thought he'd edited more recently than that! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Ref: Camille and Kennerly Kitt Page deletion
Pleased to inform you that your arbitrarily attempt to delete the article on Camille and Kennerly Kitt was unsuccessful.

Read this: Before nominating: checks and alternatives specifically parts B and C. Also read this Wikipedia Guide to deletion: Miscellaneous advice specifically part 3. If you do you will see why it was not a valid candidate for deletion.

If you are unable or unwilling to follow the steps as stated in B, C and 3 above then don't add to an article in the future.

Robcamstone (talk) 10:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You do realise that Tokyogirl was fixing another editor's nomination, not actually making the nomination herself, right? Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  11:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I wasn't nominating it for deletion myself, but completing a nomination that wasn't properly formatted. I had no true opinion as to whether or not they met notability guidelines. The thing about AfD is that even if I don't particularly agree or disagree with a nomination, people have every right to bring an article to AfD if they have an even halfway reasonable argument. The argument given by User:Knowtheory wasn't written along the lines of "they suck, no notability", wasn't written to be a blatant attack against the duo, or anything thereof, so I completed the nomination. If you have an issue with the article being nominated, the best place to make your voice heard is on the AfD entry and make an argument based upon the rationale given by the nominator. I am not the nominator. I am just someone who performed a cleanup on the nomination. If a nomination is flawed enough to where it won't make it through then odds are it'll either get snow kept or it will survive the AfD process. In any case, I have to emphasize that I am not the nominator and my actions are pretty standard for malformed nominations. Someone makes a malformed nomination, someone fixes it, AfD life goes on as normal. It's not always a good idea to arbitrarily delete or remove someone's attempt to nominate an article for deletion because I've found that sometimes even the most "obviously notable" article can be deleted. But again, I'm not the nominator and as such, this is the wrong user page to post this on.


 * On a side note, I'd really like to point you towards WP:CIVIL, as your note read as rude and a bit abrasive. Just as we're not supposed to bite the newbies, you shouldn't really go around "biting" the non-newbies either. I don't necessarily think that you were meaning to be rude or nasty, perhaps just frustrated with the AfD process (trust me, I've been there). As someone who has been editing on Wikipedia off and on since 2006-ish, as well as someone who has been in several AfD discussions in various formats, you get a better reaction and reception from people when you phrase your comments more nicely. I don't mean that you should wrap everything up in kittens and rainbows to salvage feelings, but you should make sure to read how something comes across to other people. If someone thinks that you're being rude then odds are that they'll blow off whatever advice or recommendations you're trying to make. I'd kind of recommend against posting this on Knowtheory's page in the same format you've posted here, as it just comes across as rude in tone. If you want to politely go through notability guidelines with him or her, that's be nice of you but again- please do so in a more civil and polite tone. Rudeness just runs the risk of running people off or causing more drama than it really warrants. This wasn't as bad as some of the stuff I've seen on Wikipedia, but it's generally not a good idea to cultivate this sort of persona on Wikipedia. Even if you have valid arguments or good things to add, all it takes is for someone to say that you have a history of being rude or abrasive for your contributions to be depreciated. Trust me on this. There are a good many users who have posted like this and it's brought them more drama and trouble than they'd want at times. You can blow all of this off if you want, but I notice that you're a new user with under a thousand edits and it's easier to try to change your Wikipedia persona now than it is to try to do it after another few thousand edits. This post just came across as more of you posting to be rude and abrasive rather than to be helpful. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Pot Kettle Black Robcamstone (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Thanks Yunshui!Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And by mentioning the amount of edits and length of Wikipedia service, (The quality of the edits is far more important then how many edits an individual has done Robcamstone (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)) I'm not trying to shame or throw around weight, just stating that it's easier to try to get a better reputation before you've had long years of service on here or made a ton of edits. I know that it's hard to judge how your writing comes across on the Internet or how others will read it, which is why I especially recommend using diplomacy as much as possible. You can go without, but being diplomatic will make for a far easier time here on Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And to think people opposed your AFD because they felt you were overly verbose... Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  11:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Eeyup. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Both Tokyogirl and Knowtheory are wrong, if she was really was going to fix the error then she had nothing to do as I had all ready removed the incorrect template and so no additional action was needed. Therefore by adding the template Tokyogirl in fact showed support for an incorrect deletion and as such my comments above stand. Robcamstone (talk) 11:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's sort of out of line, to remove someone's AfD nomination because you believe it is flawed. Flawed or not, the best course of action is to post a keep argument such as "Speedy keep, because of X and Y". Removing templates because you disagree with the argument can sometimes be seen as vandalism. Even if the argument sounds bad to you, removing the template is not the answer. In that instance you vote "speedy keep" and just wait for the AfD to be closed. Trying to delete the nomination by removing the template is not the way to go about things. That's not how we close AfDs. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, I want to state that the only times a non-admin can close an AfD are in very, very certain circumstances. (Non-admin_closure) Basically the only times you can keep an article is if it's for pure housekeeping, clear keep outcomes after the full 7 days have passed, or if it falls under the speedy keep category. Now I want to say that for something to fall under a "speedy keep" it usually has to be fairly extreme for a non-admin to say it should be kept, usually vandalism or something that's blatantly keepable under the notability guidelines such as "Angelina Jolie has only been in movies, not notable". Now if it does fall under a speedy keep, there are still very certain ways to close an AfD. Removing the template is not the way to go about it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Tokyogirl, when Knowtheory put a sign on the Camille and Kennerly Kitt page proposing its deletion, the sign read as follows: "If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it." Well, Robcamstone then indeed proceeded to explain on the talk page why he objected to the deletion proposal, and removed the message. These actions were valid and consistent with what the sign said. The reason why you are being criticized is due to the fact that you then put up a brand new sign which reads, "this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed". Therefore, the original sign (regardless of the formatting issues) had been taken down validly and then you came and put up a different one that cannot be removed. That's the problem. You did not merely assist a user with formatting; you CHANGED the sign to one that cannot be removed. Also, you expressed above that "I had no true opinion as to whether or not they met notability guidelines." This leads to a question: How can a seasoned Wikipedian such as yourself go ahead and help someone (who might have an agenda - one cannot know for sure) to propose an article for deletion knowing that many hundreds of hours have been put into it (hundreds of mine alone, in fact), instead of taking a look at the article first and quickly realizing that proposing that article for deletion (which had never happened since its creation in December 2011) was arbitrary and extremely drastic, and that the reasons cited for its deletion were wrong? This is destructive behavior on your part, and it discourages people from creating pages or editing on Wikipedia.


 * You CHANGED the sign to a non-removable sign after it had been validly taken down, and then you simply said that you have no opinion on the matter. Well, why didn't you have an opinion? Your action has already cost us precious time, defending the article from deletion. As an act of courtesy, the very least you could have done was to participate in the deletion discussion here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2013_March_26#Camille_and_Kennerly_Kitt


 * Finally, how and when will the sign be taken down, please? You put it up there, so at the very least you owe us this answer. Thank you for your time. Dontreader (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I have further exposed your irresponsible behavior under your own comment, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Camille_and_Kennerly_Kitt#Camille_and_Kennerly_Kitt


 * Have a nice day... Dontreader (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm very sorry for misunderstanding what happened. I have publicly apologized. Several unfortunate factors made me think that you were trying to have the article removed, together with Knowtheory. Another Wikipedian pointed out my mistake, fortunately, so that's why I'm apologizing to you. One of the reasons that made me suspicious of you was that Rob had every right to remove that first template, based on what it said. Rob actually complied with the rules, yet you criticized him for taking down the template and you almost accused him of vandalism. To me, that was a warning that something was wrong, but I must infer that you did not read that template in the page history. Anyway, I trust you now, and again I deeply apologize for my behavior. I'm just so fed up with this situation. I have invested hundreds of hours into that page, and now I'm spending time heavily to defend it against an obvious random hater of the Twins'. There were other approaches that he could have used if his intentions were good, instead of drastically proposing the page for deletion. Thanks. Dontreader (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The thing about the AfD templates is that unlike any other deletion template, you cannot remove those until the AfD has run it's course. AfD templates are entirely separate from the other deletion things in that fashion. As far as whether or not they meant it as an AfD rather than a PROD, it was set up like an AfD and KnowTheory had gone so far as to post the delete rationale in the discussion page and post the deletion tag on the AfD list for that day. It was made to look like an AfD. It's quite common for people to try to take thing to AfD if a PROD gets removed, so you can't automatically assume that they weren't trying to make an AfD. Sometimes people take thing to AfD even after they've placed the PROD and it's still present on the article. You have to prove that the nomination was entirely an accident on KnowTheory's part and that he or she only meant to PROD it. Also, we can't say that KnowTheory has a personal agenda against the group. The deletion argument is phrased in a manner that doesn't throw out any obvious "hater" vibes. Unless the deletion rationale is very, very blatant and/or you have proof where the user is doing this because they have something against the group, you must assume good faith. As far the whole vandalism thing goes, I was warning Rob because it looked like he was trying to delete the deletion discussion. Like I said on the AfD talk, if not for him coming on and pretty much accusing me of trying to purposely delete the page and phrasing it in a somewhat rude manner, odds are that this AfD would not have attracted any notice and would probably have come up and closed without any true issues. The thing to remember when pages you've created come up for deletion is that you shouldn't take it personally. Things like this will always happen and the best way to handle it is to stay calm and politely state your keep argument in the AfD. Don't take it as a personal attack. Even if KnowTheory had gone in and made personal attacks (which they haven't), it's better to just calmly state your opinion and let the AfD go to its natural conclusion.

Really, what purpose did all of this drama serve? All it's done is get hurt feeling all around and this would have been energy better spent on improving other articles. If Rob hadn't come on here, I doubt that any of this would've gotten much notice. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I thank you for your response and for your time. As I said, I deeply regret what happened. I have read your message carefully, as well as your comments on the deletion discussion page, and I appreciate all of this very much. I know your time is very valuable, so all I want to insist on is that I believe that only administrators such as yourself should have the authority to open discussions for the removal of articles, and when "common" contributors suggest that an article should be deleted, an administrator should decide whether the process is reasonable or not before going through it. A lot of time and energy would be saved that way, and there wouldn't be so many problems. This user who proposed the deletion of the article to which I have contributed hundreds of hours of my time, had never proposed a deletion as far as I can tell when viewing his contributions history, and he confessed right here on your talk page that it was very difficult for him to get it done; besides, he has only made two contributions since February 2012. Of course he wasn't going to act like a hater during the deletion process because then it would be obvious that his motive is hatred. I have read very many Wikipedia articles that are MUCH more flawed than the one he's proposing for deletion, so I have every reason to suspect that this article was targeted. As I said, if the administrators were in charge of formally proposing articles for deletion, then this never would have happened. Again, many thanks for your time and kindness. Dontreader (talk) 19:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Shahzad Rizvi
Thank you for doing the AfD on him. It was on my todo list for tomorrow's fun activities. Hmmm, I'm sending you more mental thoughts of the other items on my todo list.... Bgwhite (talk) 07:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Karmaloop
Hi, I hope I'm not doing this wrong, but I wondered whether you could create a redirect for Karmaloop to Karmaloop.com (or maybe move Karmaloop.com over to Karmaloop, which seems more logical) The page Karmaloop was locked back in 2008, and only an administrator can edit it now. Since 2008, the subject has become clearly notable - I came across it while going through Fashion requested articles, and found a number of published sources, not realising that there was already a page under an alternative name. It just seems like a logical page move to me. All best, and please do advise me if this is something I shouldn't be asking a new admin... Mabalu (talk) 23:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll open up a proposed move debate in the talk page just so it's on the up and up. It'll take a bit longer, but it'll ensure that the page isn't moved back to the current name. The main reason I'm doing this is because there could be a bit of an argument over capitalization and whatnot. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Can't lay claim to that- I borrowed it from another user because I thought it was so neat! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Rileybot (User:Riley Huntley/sandbox )
Hi. Thank you for your message on my user page. Actually that prod you saw was a test by Riley bot itself! There is no intention of prodding the sandbox, and I didn't do the prod myself anyway! You can see that if you look at the history. Well spotted, by the way. Best wishes. -- Klein zach  07:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No prob- I was thinking it was pretty strange, actually. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   07:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Chashme Badoor
Thanks for guiding, I have done it crisp and with out bullets — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saman Zara Zaidi (talk • contribs) 07:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

A challenge
Belated congrats, if I didn't give them on time. Now, Williams & Heintz Map Corporation. I think it ought to be notable, but neither MelanieN nor I can find anything worth typing in. If you can't, I think it'll have to be an AfD to see if anyone at all can... Peridon (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I did a search for sources on Williams & Heintz Map Corporation but found nothing other than notices of them winning some government contracts. Even then it's just a mention in a list of other people who received contracts from the government and winning a contract with the government isn't anything that would show notability as far as Wikipedia goes. There's really not much out there that isn't trivial in nature or a primary source of some kind. They've been open for a relatively longish time, but aren't really that long lived as a company to where that would be a good claim to fame. In other words, it doesn't pass WP:CORP and I'll support a deletion if you put it up for AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The best I can find is that some of their maps have been used as a reference in a few (three, from what I can find) journals that were published in peer reviewed journals. They're one of many maps used in some of the studies, so I don't really think that this is much of a claim to fame as it would be for someone whose maps were specifically highlighted as the main focus of the study. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Dejan Stojanović
Not sure I can help on this one, it's out of my field. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:43, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Two more sources
Articles for deletion/The Gay Travel Guide for Tops and Bottoms - with regards to this ongoing discussion, I've added two (2) more potential sources at the moment for the time being as entries in a Further reading section, at the article page. Be my guest if you wish to make use of them as well to help with the quality improvement process at the article! :) Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Well?
How is admin life treating you these days? Anyone made you their admin-slave yet? Mkdw talk 06:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not yet, although it might just be a while. I've already had one call for my powers to be stripped from me for reasons relatively unrelated to admin-type duties, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * So y'know, I'm not falling too far behind the curve. I can't say I've truly become an admin until someone vandalizes my userpage, though. (I've had that happen, but before the adminship.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * ^looks devilishly at your user page edit button^. On the contrary, someone demanding your admin privileges be revoked might be your right of passage. Mkdw talk 06:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I figure that if I'm not called "evil" or some various names for the female or male anatomy at some point in time, I'm probably either deliberately hiding under a rock or I completely fail at being an admin. I do have to say that I'm slightly disappointed at the lack of people storming onto my page to demand their pages be restored. So far, anyway. I guess I have to give them time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:40, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Good things come to those who wait. Mkdw talk 07:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:LostYearsDocumentaryPoster.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:LostYearsDocumentaryPoster.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:51, 15 April 2013 (UTC)