User talk:Sleddog116/Archives/2012/June

Get It While It's Hot
??? Why did you add a speedy deletion template to the article? I created it like 5 seconds ago. It charted in four countries, meaning it passes WP:NSONGS and thus does not quality for speedy deletion. Some people here are just so quick even for imagination. Till I Go Home talk  stalk 13:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't tag it because it doesn't pass notability - I tagged it because it duplicates what was already said in the Nodesha article. Did you read the CSD tag, or did you just immediately jump to the conclusion that I was out to get you?  Sleddog116 (talk) 13:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WELL I WAS GOING TO EXPAND THE PAGE UNTIL YOU HASTILY TAGGED IT! My gosh. Just because it currently duplicates the Nodesha article, doesn't mean that it will later. I'm going to begin expanding the article, and if you still feel that it duplicates the former, then AfD it. Till I Go Home talk  stalk 13:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, just contest the CSD tag and move on. Sometimes articles are hastily tagged, and I'm no less human than anyone else on Wikipedia.  That's why we have that little "contest" button on the CSD template. Sleddog116 (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Tornado edits
Thanks; as you can see from my most recent edits, there is disagreement on how to classify them. Some European countries count them in their tornado statistics, I know at least the Netherlands does. - Running On Brains (talk) 17:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Also sorry for not responding on my page, I just hit the "new section" button without reading the notice at the top of the page. I suggest you put the same notice in your Page Notice; this will have the notification show up above the edit box when people try to edit your page. Cheers! - Running On Brains (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 17 June 2012 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding  to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Immediate A1 tagging
I saw your speedy tagging of Telugu Association of London(TAL). Even though it was technically correct, please note that the instructions on Special:NewPages say, "Articles should not be tagged for speedy deletion as having no context (CSD A1) or no content (CSD A3) moments after creation, as not all users will have added full content in their first revision." You tagged this article for CSD A1 within 1 minute of its creation. In the future, please give editors at least 10-15 minutes before tagging A1 or A3. Thanks. -Scottywong | express _ 16:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Hasty tagging seems to be a bad habit of mine.  Sleddog116 (talk) 16:29, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Punisher, etc.
The situation has escalated and not only is Guy Macon no longer available, but I no longer trust his neutrality or competence. I would appreciate your assistance, even if it is only to yell at me. Details are on the DRN and my talk page. Snakebyte42 (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * All right. I commented on the issue at WA.  But like I said there - you had better calm down (regardless of the other guys) or it's going to get you into trouble.  Please trust me - I'm telling you all of this for your own good.  If you're not going to calm down, you will get blocked (I'm not making a threat, just saying something that I know from being on WP), and you won't be able to accomplish anything that you're trying to accomplish.  That's true whether Fortdj33 changes his behavior or not - and saying that that's not fair may be true, but it won't change anything.  Sleddog116 (talk) 23:40, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Appreciated and understood. At this point I can't say that I give a damn. Civility obviously wasn't doing the trick. If this is what it takes to bring his actions to light, so be it. I didn't ask because I thought you'd be biased in my favor. That said, I'm partially redacting the comments and will post in Wikiquette momentarily. Snakebyte42 (talk) 23:46, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling
Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. However, I do think you should take another look at the advice DGG gave you. In particular, you should learn to recognise the difference between blatant vandalism and WP:A1 -  you  didn't quite get it right at Pink shoe laces. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I'm still trying to get the hang of this, and it's frustrating because it seems like every time I do anything with CSD tagging, I do something wrong.  I've read the stuff DGG linked me to, and I'm still having trouble distinguishing between A1 and vandalism, apparently.  I always thought vandalism was blatant, unambiguous "litter" on/as articles (usually involving bodyparts, expletives, and bodily functions).  The example given at A1 is "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh."  This article was something like "He invented pink shoelaces."  I guess I'm just a little confused here; can you explain how I can tell the difference?  I don't like to mark something as vandalism unless I'm absolutely sure.
 * I'm sorry to sound so bothersome, but it's just that I want to eventually file an RfA (probably months down the road), but I'll never pass if I can't figure out this CSD stuff. Some of it I'm working on (like immediate cleanup tagging and such), but this one seems to keep getting me.  DGG gave me some really good advice, but it doesn't seem to fully apply in this case beyond the fact that both missteps were related to A1.  I understand A1 a bit better now, but this one seemed to be clear-cut, and apparently it wasn't.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Sleddog116 (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Pink Shoelaces was an obvious hoax or vandalism - by  someone who is clearly just playing games with Wikipedia. There's no real  harm in tagging such a page as A1 or A3, it'll  get  deleted anyway, but the correct criterion  helps us track the statistics better, and of course the right tag will place the appropriate message on the creator's talk page. If you are thinking of adminship, do take a moment to read WP:Advice for RfA candidates (I wrote it). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the link. I know you're one of the people who nominates RfA candidates, so I'm glad you're the one who brought this to my attention.  I had already thoroughly read that page; I know that I'm not even close right now, but I have to start somewhere.  I guess where I'm having a problem is with the "obvious" part where you said "obvious hoax or vandalism".  This guy was a new guy, and I don't like to assume vandalism with new people unless it clearly is; it's possible he was just creating a test page or something that was not really meant solely to "toy with" the project.  Am I assuming a little too much good faith with that?  Thanks for your advice.  Sleddog116 (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I suppose there's also a lot of gut feeling in applying  the right  criteria -  after all, none of us is perfect and even I make mistakes, but in over 2,000 deletions I've only restored 18 and most of those were userfications. It's all down to experience, which  IMHO is best  acquired through content editing and content talk - it avoids trying to run before you can walk. Participating in AfD discussions is a good place to start and learn a lot about deletion policies. Continuing to  work on vandal patrol is also important, but don't neglect your own content work - with  only  584 edits to article space you  still have a very long way to go, especially with providing your own content to articles rather than simply policing them. To  see how you  are doing, you  may  wish  to  opt in  for the full analysis of your edits here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:10, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW: I'm English and a linguist - what is a 'British' accent? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to the ubx on my user page? It's purely whimsical.  I'm an English tutor at a college.  I speak and use American English, but (shamelessly recognizing that there is, indeed, no true "British accent") I can rather flawlessly use Received Pronunciation when I speak.  I don't do it in everyday speaking, but I'm capable of it.  What most Americans (incorrectly) assume to be a "British accent" is what one might expect to hear on the BBC (recognizing that American laypeople without knowledge of linguistics are, in general, rather terrible at detecting the subtleties of any accent that isn't spoken here in the States).  Sleddog116 (talk) 19:36, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have to teach both AE and BE. I take my hat off to any non-native who can speak RP. I expect you'd laugh out loud at my attempts to pronounce AE! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I live in the Southern US, but I grew up in Boston and New Hampshire, so I never really developed much of an accent growing up - though I do tend to drift towards the northern New England accent from time to time. Sleddog116 (talk) 02:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * My fake AE accent probably sounds like something from Boston. I'll probably never kn w, but I'll  be visiting the US for the first time in my long life in a few days -  I'll see what the Washinton  DC accent is like.
 * The DC accent is rather generic as far as AE goes. Depending on your purpose for visiting DC, you're likely to hear a lot of different accents since many of the people who live/work in DC are actually from other places. If there's one prevalent accent, though, it's likely to be the Chesapeake accent, which has some rather interesting pronunciations. Sleddog116 (talk) 03:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Mohamed 151995
I saw your comment on his talk page, and I would like to take exception to it. I was the first editor to engage him on this topic, and I think you will see that I was unfailingly polite and calm: no "assaulting" with WP:NOT occurred. As for his level of good faith, notice that at first he wasn't aware that I could check his contribution history, and his first response was to claim that he hadn't removed the images at all.&mdash;Kww(talk) 15:23, 27 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I did see that, and I agree that my response to that was perhaps poorly worded. I saw what was illustrated by the diff you provided, and I admit that I wasn't quite sure what to make of that - that was why I told him he needed to give people a reason to AGF.  As far as the "assault" comment was concerned, I wasn't accusing anyone of assaulting him with policy, but it's very obvious that that's how he feels, and I thought my comment was phrased to that effect.  Jumping into the fray is difficult for newcomers, especially where religious articles are concerned, and I was trying to diplomatically reach out to him and encourage him a bit, but point him in the right direction.  However, my opening comments were perhaps a bit of a hasty generalization, and for that, I apologize (and I have refactored the comment accordingly).  Was my advice to him at least mostly sound?  Sleddog116 (talk) 15:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Your advice was reasonably sound. I tend to get tired of this kind of problem, and, in my experience, there's no real reason to hold out any hope to them that their wishes will come true. I try to keep more to a polite but firm notice that they just have to do different things.&mdash;Kww(talk) 16:59, 27 June 2012 (UTC)