User talk:Seresin/Archive 7

Good luck on your upcoming RFA
Thanks for the note, I might have missed that email. I've moved your RFA to Requests for adminship/Seresin Go ahead and complete it and get yourself into the mix! I might not be able to pay as much attention as I'd like (I'm in the height of busy season---working 70-90 hour work weeks right now. But I think you will make a hell of an admin!Balloonman (talk) 06:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm almost done writing my DYK article. However, I was informed that I probably will not get it up before the RfA, but I still will have written it. Feel like giving it a quick look-over? If not, that's fine too. seresin | wasn't he just...? 06:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just as an FYI, you won't see me "defending" you too much during your RfA... I don't think you need it. But, there are two other reasons why I won't.  First, it's busy season and I simply don't have the time to do so.  Second, even if I did have the time, it is my opinion that nominators often do more harm in defending their nominees than good.  People know that I'm biased.Balloonman (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't forget to respond to optional questions...Balloonman (talk) 04:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah. It's been ... hectic today and I haven't been able to sit a the computer for a length of time and give thought to my answers. I just did it now, though. seresin | wasn't he just...? 07:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

sorry
I vandalled you. I'm sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.191.65 (talk) 12:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's okay. Thanks for the note, though [[Image:Face-smile.svg|25px]]. seresin | wasn't he just...? 20:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Seresin - RE my oppose
Seresin, I posted a vote on your RfA and took some heat for it. I've disengaged from that page, but wanted to leave a personal note. My reply to NYB is probably the clearest explanation to my thought process. That said it was never meant to be personal. My intent was to make a simple vote, not start any trouble. However it goes from here I offer my best wishes. Regards.--Cube lurker (talk) 18:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I've put a question to you at Requests_for_adminship/Seresin. I will vote neutral on your adminship no matter what you reply, in order not to influence your answer. I hope you have time for it, it is important to me. &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind infinity) 15:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As you have probabaly notciced, I am not able to edit actively atm. I will be sure to answer the questions, however. As I am reviewing the conversation you linked to, I honestly do not understand what you are saying there. Would you please clarify? seresin | wasn't he just...? 20:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not sure if this was to me or xiutwel, bu tinresponse to the message on my talk page. I wish i went about the oppose differently.  To sum up.  I wanted to oppose based on the diff on the train stations where you "shouted" at people with the caps.  But I didn't.  Just figured i'd pass on by.  The other comments, they didn't make me oppose, they motivated me to actually type the oppose statement.  I should have just said I opposed on the all caps diff.  but what can i do now.  I hope this is understandable.  As an aside, i never considered an oppose vote as this sort of unforgivable sin.  I believed that in an RFA, there would be supports and opposes, and life continues.  I meant to vote oppose, but not bury myself in controversy.  Hope for the best, and if you have a question, leave a message.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It was to you. I understand why you oppose. If my explination of the diff is not sufficient, then that is fine. I think the "heat" is over, so it's all good. seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

my qy
I commented there. now just do the other, i could of course done them as an oppose, but I thought you should have a chance to explain in a positive way, instead of needing to answer an objection. DGG (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. The way you phrased the question, I get the impression that you want me to comment the actual comments in a current AfD, but not the article itself. Is this true? seresin | wasn't he just...? 20:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Reverting my usertalkpage
Hey, thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talkpage.--Sunny910910 (talk 03:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course! [[Image:Face-smile.svg|25px]] seresin | wasn't he just...? 03:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Start of the end
Febuary 14 2008, 00:00 UTC, passed just minutes ago. Today's the day when you find out the result. Unless something happens, your RFA will close within 24hours. It will probably close sometime when I'm asleep or at school so I want to tell you now that I belive in you. (I know it sounds cheesy). I guess we should have our fingers crossed starting now. Well anyway, I'll get to my point, just want to wish you luck one last time (May Jimbo himself simile upon you).--Sunny910910 (talk 00:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's Day!


A short/sweet little message, which I hope has made your day better! Happy Valentine's Day!!! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 03:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)



Adminship
Congratulations, you are now an administrator! Your RfA did have some opposition, so please ensure that you look through the comments made in opposition and consider whether you need to address any issues raised. Now is the time to visit the New admin school and, if you haven't already, to look through the Administrators' how-to guide and Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 10:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Best wishes with the shinny new buttons. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Happy adminship. :P -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 12:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Enjoy the new mop. Dloh  cierekim  Deleted?  12:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations!!! --Coppertwig (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * YEAH — Now do me a favour and delete some articles, will ya? ... Seriously, sorry once more for my mindless ranting there. (Incidentally, you can now block me if I do it in another RfA... please don't.) User:Dorftrottel 13:50, February 14, 2008
 * Pile on support for you being congratulated. Well done, even though your RfA was one of the more ridiculous in recent memory <*cough*dorftrottel*cough*>.  Have fun though.  Good slow, careful, thoughtful and deliberate, calculated fun!  (oh, and I like dorftrottel, so if he's reading this, no offense is meant.  He knows full well that he got carried off by the crazybirds though.)  He only needed a new outlet, that's all. Cheers,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  15:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Now that you've gotten there, I want to express my best wishes and hopes for your doing very well at it DGG (talk) 15:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats...My first nomination passed... despite some ridiculous objections... It was more contentious than I thought it would be... but for different reasons than I expected (I expected you name changes/age to be bigger issues.)  I hadn't pegged you as a deletionist!Balloonman (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Likewise I'm also happy that my first nomination passed. I've had faith in you the whole time, glad you didn't let me down. Anyway  CONGRATULATIONS! .--Sunny910910 (talk 23:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * May Jimbo himself smile upon this new administrator one day.--Sunny910910 (talk 23:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. I really appreciate it. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks for signinging my guestbook. Oh and now that you are an admin, I have a task for you WP:AIV is backlogged, think you can handle it?--Sunny910910 (talk 23:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. WjBscribe 00:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Spartaz Humbug! 17:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, congrats. Rather late, but do you plan on adding User:Seresin/Admin (or any other page) to CAT:AOR? dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 01:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes. Forgot about that. Done. seresin | wasn't he just...? 02:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

A slightly belated congratulations! Enjoy the buttons. When I feel stressed, I always like to make myself feel better by blocking someone. *takes tongue back out of cheek* --Ginkgo100talk 02:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad your now an Administrator, didn't realize the RFA had finished until now. But anyway hope you do well. Terra  Who are you? 21:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Per Terra. [[Image:Face-wink.svg|25px]] —Animum (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Meta Knight & King Dedede
Hi. I didn't know about the tv appearance. Please go have a wheel-war with DGG about his protecting the Meta Knight article as unredirected. I'll stick to the sidelines on this one. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC).


 * I changed to the version you & he think right in this ambiguous situation, per my talk page. The main page List of Kirby characters is not protected--protect it or semi-protect it if you think it needs--there was some unrelated vandalism, now also reverted. I wouldn't know one character from another in this game. DGG (talk) 16:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Some articles
If you feel like it, can you revert the following articles back to redirects per the injunction? They are Asterite, Vortex life form, List of characters in Baten Kaitos, Waluigi, The Revenge of Matsui, IPO (Code Monkeys), Tiny Kong, Jigglypuff, Starman (EarthBound), 20,000 Patties Under the Sea, Breath of Fresh Squidward, Night Light (SpongeBob SquarePants), Koopa Troopa, and Ben Tennyson. If you're only doing ones involving television episodes/characters, ignore the first four, Tiny Kong, and Starman. TTN (talk) 19:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I will only apply the injunction to episode articles and characters from television shows, as that is all the injunction provides for at this time. I have reverted the applicable ones you mentioned, and notified active editors of the injunction. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The Koopa Troopas have been featured in the cartoons of the series, so the injunction should technically apply there. Otherwise, video game articles are free game, right? TTN (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * While, technically, they are "free game" under the letter of the injunction, they probably aren't under the spirit. I advise you to not begin redirecting videogame articles. Perhaps start merge discussions that can be enacted after the injunction has lifted. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to go on any redirecting sprees, but I am going to make sure the above articles stay redirects, though while avoiding any wars. I just want to make sure that someone is able to back the edits just in case another person tries to use the arbitration enforcement again. TTN (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have the pages I redirected above watchlisted. If they are unredirected, I will take appropriate action. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you grab Timmy Turner‎ and Cosmo and Wanda when you get a chance? TTN (talk) 20:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It seem Wilhelmina Will has already taken care of them. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

thx
thanx for the clean up
 * Very welcome! seresin | wasn't he just...? 06:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hugh Hallihan
The user who created the Hugh Hallihan and Nine Pine pages (both since deleted) also inserted an advertisement into Blackville, New Brunswick and listed Mr. Hallihan as a prominent citizen. Should that be removed? Nine Pine could, perhaps, be worked into the restaurant section. I don't mind rolling back the article, but didn't want to remove that much without some advice. Thanks! --Prewitt81 (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

People's Republic of Mlinar
You cannot be serious about preventing speedy-deletion of this article on the basis that speedy-deletion is not for hoaxes nor blatant rubbish. I give up. Send it to AfD yourself, or leave it there to make a laughing-stock of Wikipedia. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The criteria for speedy deletion are very specific. Hoaxes are explicitly stated to not be a criterion. And blatant rubbish is not either. seresin | wasn't he just...? 20:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It meets CSD G3 ("blatant and obvious hoaxes and misinformation"), and has been re-tagged. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

arbcom injunction?
Hi. :) I'm hoping you can clarify this |this note. I'm not familiar with the arbcom injunction of which you speak, and it seems mighty curious, given the existence of Jake Ryan (Hannah Montana). What is it about that particular article that makes it undeletable or unredirectable? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually curious about the same thing. Could you possibly provide a link to the arbcom case? Mr Senseless (talk) 23:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This injunction forbids any editor from chaning the state (i.e. redirection/unredirection and deletion/undeletion) of a television-character article from what it was as of of 2:07 February 3. Although this article was created after the injunction was passed, and therefore possibly not subject to it, I'd rather not test the injunction. Feel free to do as you see fit, but do bear in mind that injunction. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow. That's bizarre. I hope they settle that one quickly. It does say "currently existing" though, so I would imagine that we're in the clear with that one. Nevertheless, I'm glad I asked, since if I had run into an article created before February 3rd, I'd have had no idea. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Which is one of the problems with the injunction. But it's really your call about what you want to do about the article; I am just going to be cautious and leave it, feel free to delete/redirect. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've redirected it. I feel safe enough with that "current" tag. Still, I made sure to note it in the edit summary. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Strange behaviour
As this diff shows, this new user added a welcome message to their talk page but decided on a second attempt to sign it with your old name. Polly ( Parrot ) 01:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Well now that is odd. We'll have to see what he says. seresin | wasn't he just...? 03:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As I just posted below, I noticed this. It's quite possible that they didn't really mean you just the single letter-personal pronoun. Just a thought. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

my semi-ed talk page
Hi, and thanks, again. See Abuse reports/8x Ranges for a report re some of the vandalism of my talk page. I don't really understand quite what's going on and see it as all huff. If it were my call, I would semi anything that an IP vandalized for at least a month. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Scrubs episodes
Sorry about that. But when people keep adding links to an article on AFD where its existence is disputed, despite a big hidden warning to the contrary, it gets really annoying. Will (talk) 11:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's okay. I know sometimes people are frustrating :] seresin | wasn't he just...? 19:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Cityscapes: A Day in Motion
Please tell me why this page keeps being deleted. It doesn't fit under the A7 rule, because it's not about the organization. It's clearly about the show itself.--Benjaminmktn121 (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Reposting of Nicole Wray's fourth studio album
Hi, I see that the page Nicole Wray's fourth studio album keeps getting recreated, by the same user and with the same content as the previous versions. I heard there is a way to block the creation of a page. Shouldn't we do it, then? Thank you, Victao lopes (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's only been re-created twice, thus not a huge problem atm. I was intending to protect it from recreation if it is created another time. seresin | wasn't he just...? 21:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Cleavage (anatomy)
I merged this page with material from Toe cleavage, Cleavage (buttocks), Whale tail and Cleavage (breasts). The move was subsequently reverted with the redirects being undone and discussions on Cleavage (breasts) opposed the merger of the article. The material on this page is a duplicate of the material on those other three pages. I apologize for the confusion. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * So you took material from Toe, buttocks, white tail and breasts and put it in anatomy, and redirected those other pages. But then the redirects were undone, which means that anatomy is a compilation of information from all of those pages? seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'm pretty sure it's okay then; deleted. seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course. seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Harald Wallerius
This person does not exit, an article with the correct name has been already created: Harald Wallin. So the nonsens article can be speedily deleted? Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 00:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Why was it created under that name then? I am confused. seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I beleive this is an alternate name for this person. Probably should be redirected.--Sunny910910 (talk 01:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Done. seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but it is not an alternate name, it is just a mixture of Harald Wallin and Erik Wallerius. Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Then why was it created under that name? seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, mea clupa. Unfortunately I mixed it up :) Doma-w (talk) 01:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is the current state of things good, then? seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's ok! But it can also be deleted as you like. Thanks for all and kind regards Doma-w (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Galicia
For a move, enforcing WP:NAME and WP:UE. See Talk:Halych-Volhynia and Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28names_and_titles%29. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 01:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. I've deleted the targed and moved it. seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 01:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD closing
Hi, I just noticed that a couple of times (Articles for deletion/Lyricpedia and Articles for deletion/ASPIDER Solutions) you closed AfD debates and then accidentally deleted the debate page rather than the article. Try and be more careful. the wub "?!"  11:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How foolish of me. Thanks. seresin | wasn't he just...? 14:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

CHU/U
Hey thanks for the note. I'll be sure to double check the qualifications before I check the contributions. Thanks for the RFA wishes as well. You'll get a more formal thank you later! Cheers, Icestorm815  •  Talk  23:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Miranda Warning
You appear to know absolutely nothing about Miranda Warning, do you even speak Spanish? I don't think you're really qualified to delete an article on them and tell people they're non-notable as you did in your reasoning. Can you therefore please reinstate the information on this band which I added.

Can I also ask that you resist deleting topics which you know nothing about. An activity that unfortunately appears to plague wikipedia.

And frankly I think your behaviour is idiotic. You didn't even check to see if there was an article on the spanish wikipedia!

Perhaps instead you'd like to go ahead and translate the spanish version? I expect you to rectify your mistake. I don't think you should expect me to rectify it.

I'm sorry to sound harsh. I'm aware you contribute a lot of good work to wikipedia and are a great asset. Only I see the hasty deletion of articles on wikipedia as very damaging. I see it all too often and I'm not even a very active user.

Supposed (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The article had no assertion of notability, which is a criterion for speedy deletion; A7 specifically. I made no comment as to the notability of the band; merely that the article made no assertion of notability. The fact that there is an article on eswiki does not matter here on en. If you can show how the article is notable, via significant converage by reliable sources that are independant of the subject, the article is suitable for inclusion. If you really feel strongly enough, I encourage you to take the issue up at deletion review. If you would like, I will move the article so a subpage of yours so that you may work on it until it meets the criteria for inclusion. Finally, please remain civil in your comments. Thank you. seresin | wasn't he just...? 04:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Usurpation
The usurped account was created on the same day as the other account's first edits, and so I ignored the 6 mo. thing thinking the accounts were created by the same people. As far as edits, they are recent and seem useful. Andre (talk) 09:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh. Is that going to become a pattern? seresin | wasn't he just...? 19:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Toucan (Software)
Just wondering why you deleted the Toucan (Software) article as it certainly doesn't seem to fit under the A7 category that the deletion was issued under? Just for the record I am the author of the program, but not it's page on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.67.5 (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted under A7, but upon reflection, A7 does not apply to products of a company/web content. So I have restored it. It may still be prodded or taken to AfD, though. seresin | wasn't he just...? 19:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed the spam notice as I intend to work on the page over the next few days (I am the user who posted above) Stevelamerton (talk) 20:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh. Silly me. Forgot to do that. Thanks. seresin | wasn't he just...? 21:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Sonic X: Curse of Raven Radix repost
You forgot to delete the talk page along with the reposted article in user space, which is also a repost of the old article's talk page. --Farix (Talk) 21:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I looked at the deleted talk page of that article, and it doesn't match the user's talk page. So you can tag it for speedy, but I don't know where it's been copied from. seresin | wasn't he just...? 21:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of J Stalin
An article that you have been involved in editing, J Stalin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/J Stalin (2nd nomination). Thank you. Icamepica (talk) 05:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

j stalin
and did you see this:

"except for the following: Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble. Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories."at WP:NMG?Icamepica (talk) 05:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

your opinion...
Could you look at these? 

I made these edits a few hours ago and it has now occurred to me that maybe I should have waited. FWIW, there are over a hundred such articles. Thanks, Jack Merridew 10:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Leigh Lezark
I disagree with your contention that no-context CSD did not apply here. An article which merely says "So-and-so was a member of A Band" is not sufficient context for identification to the point of showing why that person's article belongs in Wikipedia. Please don't stretch the Wikipedia definition of context to the point of absurdity. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I continue to disagree that this was sufficient context. It is a moot point now, since the article was redirected. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of an Article
I am sorry that I didn't get the notification of the significance of the Cashel Dennehy School of Irish Dance article up quick enough but I am a very busy person and just couldn't get to it in enough time. If you could move article to a sub-page of mine so I could get it finished that would be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bboy14 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have restored it to User:Bboy14/Cashel Dennehy School of Irish Dance. seresin | wasn't he just...? 22:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mumeishi Kendo Club
You deleted this article on the grounds that it is "an article about a compnay that did not assert importance". As the name of the title says, the article deals with a club not a company. How does one assert importance in a new article? The club was formed in 1968, so it is hardly a fly by night organization. Reading the article would have shown you that every year it hosts the largest Kendo competition in the UK. Cite me for creating a poor article, but please don't be sloppy in your analysis of its possible violations of Wikipedia rules (I would level the same criticism at BigDunc). Derek farn (talk) 02:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Extraphone
As per this discussion

I find in the first hand that putting by User:Jamesontai the tag "speedy deletion" on this article is rather strange. I have not seen any comment or justification from the part of User:Jamesontai on the discussion page and the automaticly prepared explications in the tag do not explain anything relevant to the article itself. I saw User:Jamesontai amuses homself by putting these tags with a speed of a certain number almost per minute in numerous articles. I am afraid this is simply about abusing of the right to put such tags.

Unfortunately, you did not explain anything on the talk page either or anywhere else at all. I am sorry, but my questions remain unanswered. Putting simply a tag does not mean automatically that what's written in it is relevant to the contents of the article (it spoke of importance of personalities, whereas the article is simply of one of the biggest record labels in Russia and former Soviet Union (1/6th of Earth for your information)). Secondly, referring me to the plain rules for the second time is simply not polite, not justifying or explaining your actions is rather characteristic of some form of dictatorship than of a free encyclopedia. I find such behaviour of yours as nuisance to Wikipedia and ask you to bring back the article, moreover, feel free to operate necessary changes (if any there are) in it in order to wikify it, since you seem to know the Wikipedia rules so well. In the case where you do not bring back the article, please inform me how and where can I complain and appeal of your behaviour. Thank you very much in advance. --Rubikonchik (talk) 16:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As for your first message, thank you very much for these details as they were really useful in understanding your actions, although belatedly. Yes, go head, please bring back the article and I will improve the wording and a couple more of paragraphs on their activities. You know it takes some time to create an article, even a short one. Why did not you just write it on the talk page before you decided to delete the page? I would have tried to bring you more feedback and in case it wouldn't have been enough we could have discussed how to change the wording, style, eventually add more paragraphs and/or sections - in other words normal constructive approach to make a good article. Instead you baldly delete in the following rather authoritarian and ignorant at the same time attitude: "who cares, I know nothing anyway about it and I won't bother to move my (you know what) to make sure I know more about the subject anyway, nor will I bother to write the user who wrote the article what is there to improve, I'll just delete"... As for your second message, look, I would appreciate if you could change your aggressive attitude and show some good faith please. This being said, please be specific, which article, what source are you going to delete next. First you delete the article on a record label company, specifying only days after the article was deleted why it was actually deleted. Now you don't even bother specifying anything at all, you are just threatening me. What is your problem really? I think you could change your approach to a more constructive one if you are here for a long time and know so well all the rules.--Rubikonchik (talk) 00:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)Rubikonchik

RFB questions
Hey Seresin, thanks for your (many arduous!) questions at my RFB! I'll try to get them answered as soon as possible - I've got a micro-crisis in real life but it should be over by noon today... fingers crossed. Cheers for your interest. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 07:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey again, thanks for your extra questions. It's real late here, I'll do my best to get back to you, although the weekend does curtail my edits. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Artistic Minds Societ
Thank you for your help. I was trying to explain the situation to that guy, but he did not want to hear mr out. I dont know if you saw my message to him as I am still getting used to how this all works, but this is what I wrote to him. I only added the page because the Artistic Minds Society was listed in reference on the High IQ Societies article. In the article many of the societies listed had corresponding pages as well. This page does nor differ in any way from any of those, and if this one is deleted then those should as well. It makes no sense to allows all those societies to have articles but not this one.

There one nothing in this article touting it, making it sound better or special, or anything else that could be deemed as promotional. It is exactly along the lines of every other high iq society article included here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmestre (talk • contribs) 04:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)