User talk:Sjc

Your user page history
Hi Sjc, I just imported 10 edits of your user page from the Nostalgia Wikipedia, a copy of the Wikipedia database from 20 December 2001. I'm going through the list of most heavily edited pages on the Nostalgia Wikipedia, and your user page was #769 on that list. I Hope you don't mind, and that the earlier history isn't a hindrance to your work. Graham 87 14:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Sjc! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 5 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Helen Atkinson-Wood -
 * 2) Roy Hudd -
 * 3) Ruby Walsh -
 * 4) Gordon Sparks -
 * 5) Dan McCauley -

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
Content


 * News items and announcements
 * Contest


 * Featured editor: Teeninvestor
 * Featured administrator: WereSpielChequers


 * Want ads
 * Feature: FeydHuxtable: Search Techniques

Deletion debate of Siperia
Hello, you created the page Siperia as a stub in 2006. Since then house has been destroyed in a fire, amogst others. I am seeking to delete this poor quality article, and would much appreciate comments. Thank you! --hydrox (talk) 11:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

More shenanigans on your user page
Hi Sjc, I encountered your user pages again while doing another search for lost edits in the Nostalgia Wikipedia. This time I'm searching for pages that end in "/talk" rather than the proper suffix of "/Talk"; any pages using "/talk" were swallowed up in the conversion to Phase II software in January 2002. Therefore I imported the edits at Sjc/talk on the Nostalgia Wikipedia to User talk:Sjc/old. While I was checking your talk page history for any signs of the 2001 text, I discovered that several of your user pages were improperly deleted by an adminbot run by in April 2008. The adminbot searched for user pages which were not attached to an account, and deleted them all indiscriminately; for example, there is no user by the name of "Sjc (old Talk 3)", so User:Sjc (old Talk 3) was deleted. The adminbot also deleted user pages of accounts from 2001, just because they weren't registered, such as User:Mike Dill. I have undeleted all the affected pages and moved them to more appropriate titles, so *you*, rather than a crazy computer program, can decide what to do with them. I undeleted and moved these pages in your userspace: User:Sjc/old Talk 2, User:Sjc/admin reference, User:Sjc/Work in Progress, and User:Sjc/old Talk 3. If you want any of these pages re-deleted, either tag them or let me know. However I (and other admins) would be more reluctant to delete the talk pages per the policy about user talk page deletion. Graham 87 11:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * To clarify, I would only be a bit reluctant to delete User talk:Sjc/old, since it contains significant history. The rest of the pages can stay or go at your pleasure. Graham 87 11:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Marina Tsvetaeva
Hi Sjc, I'm not sure if this page is still operational, I saw you made some edits in March. I see that you created most of the copy for Marina Tsvetaeva and would love to talk with you about it, if you are still around. I'm trying to add the required in-line citations which is quite a job after the fact. The prose and narrative stand up really well, I think. Would be great to pick your brain. Drop me a line if you can. Best wishes Span (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Victor Meldrew for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Victor Meldrew is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Koopatrev (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Philippe Buonarroti
Hi Sjc,

The article for Philippe Buonarroti has been challenged as to whether he was a Freemason. As you added this, would you be able to provide a citation please?

JASpencer (talk) 17:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Administrators&oldid=526254016#Restoration_of_the_tools_.28proposal.29 recent change] to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Gunnies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gunnies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 05:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Al-Qanoon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Al-Qanoon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. OrangesRyellow (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Draugr, recently moved to Draug, should be moved back. The discussion may be found at Talk:Draug. (I note the retirement notice, but thought I should notify you anyway as a courtesy.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:09, 29 July 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Proposed deletion of The Cloggies


The article The Cloggies has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unreferenced and completely irrelevant."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Trunky (talk) 10:05, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Timex (Unix)


The article Timex (Unix) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "A timex command that does not have any kind of independent notability. There do not appear to be any sources that discuss it any significant manner."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rorshacma (talk) 15:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Smuggling in fiction for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smuggling in fiction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Smuggling in fiction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

"World War II/Edited Text" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=World_War_II/Edited_Text&redirect=no World War II/Edited Text] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 23:58, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for One Foot in the Grave
One Foot in the Grave has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster  (chat!)  07:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Beast of Bodmin Moor


The article Beast of Bodmin Moor has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: '''Believe that this article should be deleted for the following reasons:

1 - Poorly sourced to the point of being effectively unsourced, with nearly all sources being random blogs and "cryptozoology" (a recognised pseudoscience) books.

2 - Subject is not notable enough to warrant its own page, the only fact undisputed (that there is an urban legend regarding a big cat on Bodmin Moor) can be included under the page "British big cats" which covers this precise topic in general.'''

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of The Monk (Doctor Who) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Monk (Doctor Who) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Monk (Doctor Who) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Pokelego999 (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of The Cloggies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Cloggies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Dronebogus (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Sonic screwdriver for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sonic screwdriver is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Jontesta (talk) 04:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)