User talk:Ryan Vesey/Archive 1

Wii Motion Plus Edit
Hi, why you have removed the supported game list from wii motion plus? it was very useful and updated regularly, probably the most useful info of the entire page, if you don't like it or you think is "bulky" (i don't care the bulky thing to be honest) you should at least create a new page with that list. I'm a noob on wiki, just registered to write this message to you, i don't know how to use the sandbox, please restore that list somewhere in Wikipedia. thanks for reading. Regards. Catu Carabai (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
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 Windom, Minnesota, 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. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:59, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, Ryan Vesey, 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! -- sdgjake (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 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

Example
It is a disambiguation page. You seem to have got the idea that all disambiguation pages must have "(disambiguation)" in their title, which isn't true. A disambiguation page about subject X only needs to have the title "X (disambiguation)" if there is already an article at the title "X". For instance the page Atom (disambiguation) is at that title because there is an article at the title Atom. In the case of Example there is no article at the main title, so the disambiguation page is located at the main title. That's why I reverted your page move. Hut 8.5 10:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, it's a pretty common mistake. Hut 8.5 14:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Fasting and World Hunger
Hi. I've declined your speedy on the above because it doesn't fit the criterion. The nonsense tag is for real gibberish, but this page is just incomplete. Give it longer to see what happens. It's got a new article for review tag on it, so someone will deal with it in the course of time. Some of these speedy tags can be a bit confusing, but they all have fairly tight definitions. Took me a while to get them sorted in my mind. (Still have to check the list, too, sometimes...) Peridon (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If it's not been touched in a day or two, tag it or  - in a way both apply. Give it that bit of leeway. Very often people start and get interrupted, then come back later to finish. Any with the new for review tag will be seen - they go on a list somewhere (haven't found it yet - very new as an admin) and won't slip through the net. When I was tagging for csd instead of actually deleting them, I used to ignore most of those except for blatant spam, copyvio or attack. Anything that just consists of "Shawn is awesome!!!!!!!" or "@*%£$ you" can be tagged straight away, of course. Anything you're not sure of, don't be afraid to ask me or any of the regular editors. (You can spot us by the length of the contribs list...) Peridon (talk) 20:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * E.Wing has moved it now. Peridon (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Plank Hill article
I took a look at the article you pointed me to. I wasn't able to find a WP guideline dealing specifically with places/landmarks to draw from, but I tend to agree that Plank Hill is not sufficiently notable to warrant an article. Even the book source cited seems to treat the name as colloquial rather than official. I did some database searching on my own and got no results. An elephant's being buried there, even if verified, doesn't strike me as making the place notable either. I see your point about not wanting to dissuade an editor from contributing, though, too. Other editors might disagree with me on this, but I'd probably let the article stand with the notability tag for a while longer, and see whether it improves. If not, then bring it up for deletion discussion. --some jerk on the Internet   (talk)  13:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia
WTF do you think wikipedia is??? Its a wiki. Articles are to be expanded (like in just 13 minutes)!!!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I expanded Ain't That Lovin' You, Baby and Beyond the Reef and also started Napua Stevens. Actually I had been listening to some of his Christian songs on youtube and had expected them to have full articles on here but they didn't exist. I figured that they'd be expanded eventually given the amount of Elvis fans. If there is not enough info for a seperate article then a redirect to the film or album would be OK. In my experience though the way wikipedia grows is by people bothering to do the research, not taking short stubs at face value and thinking they can't be expanded... ♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Mmm, that was the same reason for the AFD of Martin Miller (Czech actor).♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Libyan Civil War
A majority concenssus was reached at the articles discussion page to move the article and the discussion was closed but nobody moved the article, could you move it please? EkoGraf (talk) 13:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer Granted
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. Mifter (talk) 01:23, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: What is the best way to cite a page.
Hi Ryan, the cite button at the top leads you to refToolbar 2.0, which I've never used. However, judging by its help page, it fills out references correctly with citation templates, so it's a good option for adding references to articles. However, I think it's a good idea to learn how to do it manually as well; for that, see Referencing for beginners with citation templates. Graham 87 02:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding
Sometimes a lag between revisions on Huggle will cause a warning sent to a vandal to instead be sent to the last person who edited the page. A warning was sent when Haxx1337 had did the vandalizing; however, your new revision popped up as the command was being processed and sent the warning to you. My apologizes. I have blocked the user and again want to thank you for your diligence and understanding. Kindly Calmer   Waters  04:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:PROD
Hi. Proposed deletions can be contested by anyone for any reason by removing the prod tag. See WP:PROD. Rettetast (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

re: Bushclosure
I have declined your speedy-deletion nomination on that page because it does not meet any of the very narrowly defined criteria allowing for speedy deletion. The article creator has already removed the PROD nomination (which he/she is allowed to do) so I recommend that you nominate the page to AFD next. Rossami (talk) 16:27, 15 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) 07:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Well I was about to come back to you and say that it was too early to block that IP and that I'd issued them with a final warning, but hah no sooner had I posted on AIV that I'd given the user a final warning about long term vandalism, they vandalised again! They've now been blocked for 31 hours.--5 albert square (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)