User talk:Staxringold/Archive4

Recognition
N.B. If you're interested, I'd like to nominate you for another RFA, as you have certainly improved the quality of your contributions to a stellar level. Pleas get back to me, and I'll begin a nom in a few hours if you accept. Again, great work. Harr o 5 04:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm about to have a school activity start, but I'll get to writing a nice nomination in two-three hours. I'll leave a note when it's done. Harr o 5 05:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Batter up! Harr o 5 06:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You have 9 positive votes including mine, it's looking good. Mostly Rainy 11:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Online
Hey! Get on AIM, you bum! &mdash; Scm83x hook 'em 06:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Archives
Hi Staxringold, I've got a question for you related to Archives as sources. What was your impression on the acceptability of using archives that were "published" online? See, for example. I wasn't sure if that was covered during the big debate over archives, and I'd like to know what's acceptable for me to use in articles I'm working on related to Penn State (Penn State Department of Industrial Engineering, etc.). If you get a chance, let me know if you have any pointers. Thanks. --Spangineer[es] (háblame)  13:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

This "Tony" guy
I see you ran into the same problem I did. I complained on the Talk page about the "drive-by" nature of some of these comments. As a result, there's a taint on the articles so bad that no one even looks at it anymore. If you have any suggestions on how to deal with this, I'm open. Jtmichcock 15:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

FAC Help
Ha! The tables have turned! Can you help me with the deconstructivism nom on FAC? I didn't write it, but the nomination is vote-poor and needs some help. Thanks for your time, and happy to be of service in the past, RyanG e rbil10 16:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your participation in the FAC. It's now a featured article, your vote was invaluable. Thanks, RyanG e rbil10 05:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:John rowland 01.jpg
"The image appears to have to extreme, unique factors that give it any great commercial value." is written as FU rationale. It sounds kinda confusing, re-wording perhaps? (to --> no). Just to note, so if You use the line in the future... feydey 15:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
, thank you for participating in my RfA. Unfortunately, a great number of oppose voters felt that I lacked experience, and a consensus was not reached (the final tally was 30/28/10). Perhaps I will try again in another few months when I have a few more edits under my belt. If I do, I hope I can count on your support. Thanks again!

Cool3 talk 20:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC) (UTC)

A haiku of thanks

 * Thanks for your support
 * In my RfA, which passed!
 * Wise I'll try to be.

Your support made me laugh - thanks for that too!

-- Nataly a 04:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction
Hi - Thanks for this correction. I run a tool that parses the FAC logs and have to look at its output fairly closely since the heuristic it uses to figure out the nominator is "first user who's mentioned" (which works at least 80% of the time). I must have missed this one. The correction will show up in List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations the next time I regenerate it (done with a tool that parses the by-year articles). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Three Laws of Robotics
How does it look now? Anville 15:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!
You're now an admin after an impressive showing of community support. I recommend being conservative with the new tools, especially at first, and re-reading the relevant policy before acting. Again, congratulations, and have fun with your new tools. - Taxman Talk 19:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I would like to be the first (non-closing bcrat) to congratulate you on your new position! You deserve it! &mdash; Scm83x hook 'em 19:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * *yells "congratulations" in your general direction* ;)  Radio Kirk   talk to me  20:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * All right! Nice job... --Osbus 20:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Good job. :) Dlohcierekim 20:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations (and thanks for fixing the headings in my talk page :-) )! --Deathphoenix ʕ 21:08, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, and you're very welcome. Happy editing!  --M e rovingian { T C @ } 21:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats. Please check image copyright status, but also be careful as deleted images cannot be undeleted.--Jusjih 23:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats! You deserve this! -- S iva1979 Talk to me  02:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm jumping on the bandwagon here witha somewhat late congrats. I see you've already used the gift from God that is the rollback button, and we need them to stop this pro-Roxbury vandalism at Hopkins at present. Anyway, good luck with the new role, and just ensure you act responsibly (but everything's reversible, of course). On another note, I see you've updated your user page with a quiet note on the UConn choice. May I say congrats on that too (college v. admin, what's more important? :p), and a good choice. I'm here in Oz, but good family friends live in Fairfield CT, and I've visited in 1998, so I know the place a bit. Great choice, a smart choice, and as long as you get Rudy Gay's autograph you won't look back with regret. Harr o 5 04:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats! It's always a pleasure to support an established editor, who passed Diablo's Test, turn admin! Trusting your integrity in conflict resolution... Anwar 10:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I Lost on Jeopardy
I contend the ref is correct, as it's the exact title of the song. Please leave it.

It's not vandalism, as both "Weird Al" and Cliff Clavin lost on Jeopardy. This is turning into a revert war, and since you've reverted three times today, please stop. Alan 02:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I've contacted another admin to resolve this revert war/content disagreement issue. Alan 02:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that. I took it out because the block expired. Alan 02:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you know what happened to the article I Lost On Jeopardy? Robert K S 13:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

QuickBugs Deletion
I noticed that you deleted the QuickBugs article that I posted earlier today. Although new to Wikipedia, I did first spend several hours researching similar postings of other articles on specific products. I tried to state the facts without any marketing hype and make them consistent with hundreds of other such articles.

For example, take a look at the articles referenced from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UML_tools

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_authoring_tool

The QuickBugs was a brief description of non-promotional text summarized from Excel Software's web site with full permission.

Please explain how it differs from the articles referenced above.

I've worked in the area of software modeling tools and methods for 20+ year and had planned to write several other articles explaining Causal Loop Diagrams, Time Simulation of Dynamic Systems, Structured Analysis & Design, etc. but at this point it will be difficult to justify any additional time spent on Wikipedia.

SoftwareDeveloper 01:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Meg Mathews
You made the wrong call here. Please restore and VFD it if you must. --Dtcdthingy 04:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

QuickBugs Article Deletion Followup
As a followup to the QuickBugs article deletion, I looked at each of the eight articles I posted and discovered some interesting facts.

Every article was suggested for deletion, by the same 4 user names, in the same order, with the same comments, in approximately the same time period.

Doesn't this smell a bit fishy to you?

SoftwareDeveloper 05:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

MY RFA
Hey Staxringold! I have received a nomination for adminship which can be seen here. Please feel free to add to it and thanks for your support on the Impossible Princess article. Its GA was passed! :) -- Underneath-it-All 22:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I need help!
I'm trying to create a template for Hoodoo Gurus, containing pertinent links to articles such as members, albums, etc., but I'm not having any luck. If I could get the page created, I could easily modify another template to work for them. How do I get the page started? Alan 02:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I knew that. It's weird, but the first 7 dozen times I tried to do that, it didn't work. Now it does. WUWT?Alan 04:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Plano Senior High School FAC
Just wanted to let you know that I have started up Plano's long awaited FAC here. I really appreciate all of the help that you have given me on the article, really pushing me toward FAC and encouraging me with the passage of your own Hopkins School! I hope you will support and help me fight off the objects! &mdash; Scm83x hook 'em 08:53, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

that's all you had to say...i honestly didn't know that was considered vandalism. i'm sorry.

-the person who edited the MCR page.

Possible block candidate
The user from IP 71.4.78.130 has only contributed vandalism. I suggest that IP be blocked.

Reverted Fencing edit
Hey, I reverted this edit to Fencing because there is already a references section.-- digital_m  e ( t / c ) 22:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight
You supported Battle of Amiens, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 16:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

RfA/Gurch
Thanks for your, er, Crazy Yee-haw-hoo-doggy support – Gurch 16:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Asstree, Alabama
Hi, I'm the author of the Asstree article. I was just wondering if I did something wrong with the picture that caused the article to be deleted. The town is real; I lived there as a child and know all about its quirky history. It was very small, though, and our high school only had (about) 150 students. The town as a whole had a population of 800. It's a lovely little place. If it was the picture that got me, please tell me how to do that the right way. I hope that you'll read the article as I continue with it!

Please do not misunderstand me. I don't even know what an "attack page" is. I would appreciate it if you would explain that to me. Was it the pioture? I'll take the picture off, but I'm not "attacking" anything. I'm just talking about the town where I grew up. Sorry. Don't block me without fully detailing to me what it is I've done wrong.

Okay, fine, but what is an "attack page?" I'm not attacking anyone. I put it back up there without the picture, and I'll do it again, too. I'm not the biggest computer person, but I know that Wikipedia lets you debate articles before deleting them or blocking you. Just give me some time to find sources. There are 800 people in this town, and it's not exactly well-known. Let me look around.

You know what, you're just a mean person! Yes, I said it! You still won't tell me what an attack page is, and... hold on!

What? You don't know me, at all! Didn't I say that I go to school in DC? I live in a town in Maryland that's like fifteen miles out of DC. I'm not giving you my exact town because it's the Internet and I'm not stupid; I know what happens to girls who give out their locations online.

So, now because I made this article about some place you don't know, I'm like a liar or something? Why in the world would I lie about being Polish!?! And, for your information, Szczebrzeszyn is a city in Poland, and you pronounce it "Shteb-je-shin", and it's an awesome place! You are just totally mean and you are being really stupid! I'm allowed to make an article, too!

Jeez, I'm sorry that I did the wrong thing with the picture. Stop threatening me with "attack pages."

And you still haven't even told me what that is yet!!!

Ahhh!!!

Are you like, totally freakish!?! Okay, OMG, no. "Ass" means donkey! Like you've never heard of that. I am so tired of people making fun of me! Everyone up here says that, and now you're not even taking me seriously, but you're not doing it to be funny or whatever, you actually don't believe me because of the name of my town! OMG!!!! I try not to be mean, but there are some people who just make me upset. This is like, .... arrrgh!!! I am so mad at you!

And, anyway, who am I supposed to be attacking? Even if the town were made up, who would the target of the article be? An empty swamp in Marion County? I'm going to call someone, I don't know who. Just because you think something is funny doesn't mean that other people don't take it seriously.

"Ooh, 'Asstree,' she must be making that up! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!" No, it's not. There are tons of things like that, and you're just rude, and my town deserves an article! I'm writing it, and you should let me finish and actually read it before you delete it, because it's a beautiful town and it was a great place to grow up, and it's just great.

Nanaszczebrzeszyn 02:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Nanaszczebrzeszyn

Albertosaurus
Don't suppose you would mind commenting on our FAC for Albertosaurus, would you? There were a number of comments which I feel we have addressed, but as the nomination moves farther and farther down the page, we have gotten fewer responses. You seem to be very active there so your input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Sheep81 11:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image PR
Honestly I forgot to do it when I got home last night. I am currently working on closing some of the older nominations, but when I finish I'll give it a try. -- moondigger 00:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support
Dear , Thank you very much for your support on my recent RfA. I am pleased to announce that it passed with a tally of 72/11/1, and I am now an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the tools, but please let me know if there are any admin jobs I can do to help you, now or in the future. —Cuivi é nen 02:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Bethereds
I fail to see how my edit of that page is considered vandalism, I removed plenty of ireelevant material from that article, that is all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethereds (talk • contribs)

WP:WOT
Great comments on your part. Haizum 06:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Stubs and No Sprites For You!
When you encounter a short article like No Sprites For You! (you described it as "a one sentence article with an infobox"), it often best to flag it as a stub or add rather than deleting it entirely. Could you please restore the article and add an appropriate stub or expand tag to it? TruthbringerToronto 18:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks!
--Pilot| guy 22:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Eagle Scout FAC
I thought y ou'd like to know that Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America) is up for FAC. Rlevse 23:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I remember when we met too, we got off on misunderstanding, but I now consider use Wiki-buddies. Thanks for the support vote! Rlevse 23:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC) PS: Click on the Robbins Type 5 medal, that's my own personal Eagle medal. Rlevse 23:41, 19 June 2006 (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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Amiens conclusions
Hi Staxringold,

I'm wondering if we should look at cleaning up the conclusion to the Battle of Amiens. The bit I have a problem with has been there for a while - I can't see the original compositor. Since I am v. inexperienced, and you have been tweaking this page a fair bit, I thought I'd run it past you.

Currently:Amiens was also a turning point in the tempo of the war. The Germans had started the offensive before the war devolved into trench warfare with the Schlieffen Plan. Then after the Race to the Sea the Western Front line moved very little for several years. Finally the German Spring Offensive earlier that year had once again given Germany the offensive edge on the Western Front. Armored support helped the Allies tear a hole through trench lines, weakening once impregnable trench positions. The British Third army with no armored support had almost no effect on the line while the Fourth with less than a thousand tanks broke deep into German territory, for example.[1]

Seems messy to me: 1. do we need to recap the course of the war? 2. "Armored support" sentence is repetitive, and also wrong - the German positions at Amiens were anything but "impregnable", they had been established 4 months earlier and had had little work done on them. Except for strongpoints, the whole position was poorly laid out and wired. 3. British Third army had nothing to do with Amiens 4. I'm not really sure what was intended in this conclusion - is it to say that armour was vital? If so it is a bit questionable as there were no major tank attacks after to compare to, and tanks were of patchy value during this battle.

Don't really know exactly what should be said here, but I'm pretty sure either or both of us should be able to clean it up considerably.

Your thoughts?

regards

Frank

Sound of the day
You expressed interest in WP:FSC, and as that didn't go anywhere, I think this might function as a workable intermediate step to building a "sound community" on Wikipedia.--Pharos 13:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Knights of Columbus
Hi! I wanted to thank you for your comment on the Knights of Columbus FAC page! I tried to address your concerns, but I really did have a tough time finding a person or group who offered direct criticism of the Knights. I did put the officers into a box, however. I hope you will consider supporting the FAC nomination now! Thanks! --Briancua 19:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the support for the Knights FAC! As you can see, the only complaint right now is from Tony about the prose, so if you have some time to do a little copyediting as well it would be great! thanks! --Briancua 14:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I raised several issues about the lack of criticism in the Knights of Columbus article and included references to support what I said. Could you reconsider your vote for support until these issues are addressed? Best, --Alabamaboy 16:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Velociraptor
Fixed one of your requests. Working on the other... Thanks, Spawn Man 23:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Vote on Fir0002 FPC
Hi Staxringold! I was wondering if you could leave your comments on this page? Thanks! --Fir0002 04:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

V0.5
Stax, in with my GA and V0.5 work, I've selected your Hopkins School and also University of Michigan, both FAs for V0.5. I have Eagle Scout up for V0.5 too. Did you notice it made FA after about 6 days and had no objections? I was surprised. Thanks for voting for it! Rlevse 20:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?
RE: 05:09, 24 June 2006 Staxringold (Reverting image vandalism. I'm not happy that you chose to label my contribution to the TH article "vandalism". That was wrong! Tropiwikian 21:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Response
Thanks, um... I have yet to actually leave Wikipedia. Beginning tomorrow, I will conduct an occasional edit and have my hands tied up currently since I want to expand a section in the Cool (song) article before my official departure. I am glad that you would have turned to me for assistance on the Alison Krauss article, but unfortunately, I must politely decline your request. I did notice, however, that the sentence "Krauss entered the musical world" (from the lead section) is a bit odd: the musical world? You should try and be more specific, such as "Krauss made her debut in the music industry".

Anyway, thanks once again. Good luck to you and the article. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You could say that I am departing from Wikipedia for two essential reasons: school and Wikipedia. Currently, I am not in my home country of Canada, but in Japan where I am studying psychology (and attempting to do a bit of musical research simutaneously). Additionally, I was introduced to several very ignorant Wikipedians who stalked me and followed me around because of a previous relationship that they had experienced. But please do not speak with them about the matter because it is already behind us. Although I would not be surprised if they suddenly popped up and left a message here or on my talk page. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Then you ended up on the right side of the track. You see, Bishonen, after an unfortunate experience, would not let me have the time of my day. When I edited an article of hers (partly out of vegenance, but also partly because I have this obsession with placing words alphabetically when listed [cabbage and tomatoes or milk, telephone]), she insisted that I was trolling and when I edited one of Giano's pages (purely out of curiosity of some of the writing), she immediately "banned" me from that article because she &mdash; or someone "close" to her &mdash; had edited it. This is misconduct from an admin, but I don't really care anymore. While not my first reason, she furthers my intention to leave. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Hi / Shameless request for help
I'd be glad to help out with Alison Krauss, and thanks for the compliment about the Mariah Carey article. Make sure that album and song titles are correctly capitalised per WP:NC, e.g. Too Late to Cry and not Too Late To Cry. I usually spell out numbers and chart positions below one hundred, but I don't think the Manual of Style goes either way so it's just a matter of personal preference. A little detail could go, for example I don't think we need to know the title of the Buffy episode that "That Kind of Love" was used in, and also when referring to chart positions in biographical articles about musicians I feel it's best to state "top five" and "top twenty" instead of #3 and #13. Perhaps a little more critical appraisal could be included as well, but also instead of "one critic" or "some critics" it's best to actually mention the critic's name or the publication.

I should also note that this is much better than many articles about contemporary musicians. The most important thing is not to get too stressed in thinking that all of the issues raised have to be resolved on this FAC. In fact, it's sometimes better to take things slightly slower; it provides the opportunity for editors to reconsider things they may not have if they had been worried about not improving it "in time". I think I worked on the Mariah Carey page for about ten months before it got promoted to featured status, and Kylie Minogue (which I think is the best Wikipedia article on a contemporary musician) went through something like four FA nominations. Good luck. Extraordinary Machine 21:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I borrowed those books from the library, so I'm afraid they're not immediately available. But I'll see if they're still there the next time I go. Extraordinary Machine 00:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * During my research, I found that the articles and books I read didn't really discuss her physical appearance in depth, except in relation to her "transition" during the late 1990s, which is covered in the article. Hmm...it's very difficult deciding what info to include and what not to include. Extraordinary Machine 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Tom DeLay FAC
Thanks for getting back to me, and thanks for the Support vote. I think that your comments about the length are legitimate, and I will cut down the section on the investigation. I am also not sure about what to do with the "Accusations of misuse of federal investigative agencies" section. It could go in the third paragraph of the "Investigation of alleged misconduct in Texas fundraising and indictments", but the House Ethics Committee admonishment belongs in the "Majority Leader" section. Do you have any suggestions? Also, I sourced the information about DeLay's pro-life views and votes. NatusRoma | Talk 05:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Alison Krauss
Hey, no problem. As small as the font is I had to go to the edit pane to make sure I was seeing it correctly. &mdash; Zaui (talk) 20:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S. I liked your Places I've been box so I stole it.&mdash; Zaui (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Johnny Cash page
I delegated out the lists from the Johnny Cash page to see if we can get it back to FA status. -- 64.175.42.87 00:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration
Hi, Stax. Considering your conversation with User:Eternal Equinox, you might be interested in this. Bishonen | talk 03:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

Featured Picture
Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 05:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Alison Krauss FAC

 * Hi, I have reviewed the article again and I think it has been significantly improved, however I must still agree there is more to be added. Maybe nominating the article again in several weeks when more additions to the content have been made. Dbertman 11:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

feedback on your ADARSH SAMAJ SAHYOG SAMITI deletion
Hi. As an admin it's your perogative to delete an article whenever you want, but I respectfully disagree with your deletion of ADARSH SAMAJ SAHYOG SAMITI and the way you handled it:
 * First, I left a message for the creator, Adarshsamaj, a new user, spelling out the changes he should make.
 * Second, 3 different people looked at the article and left comments on the talk page, all concurring the creator should be given a chance to correct the deficiencies.

Unless this article had previously been through the PROD or AfD process and deleted, why not give the article a couple of days?


 * From Deletion guidelines for administrators:
 * "Do not delete a page containing a personal essay or other content from the main article namespace without first posting a copy elsewhere (e.g., in a different namespace or on the meta), unless the content is simply vandalism. Wikipedia is not a repository for all manner of nonsense that happens to be posted. To be clear, however, a good faith attempt to write an encyclopedia article, no matter how poorly worded, biased, or otherwise flawed, will not be considered vandalism."
 * "Use common sense and respect the judgment and feelings of Wikipedia participants."
 * This includes not just the creator, but the 3 other editors that reviewed. A courtesy comment on any of the user talk pages would have been a polite thing to do. This sort of incident makes one feel like they're really wasting my time trying to coach and encourage newcomers (for that matter, even just reviewing and evaluating new articles).
 * "When in doubt, don't delete."
 * To my knowledge, this article met none of the criteria for Criteria for speedy deletion except possibly "Unremarkable people or groups/vanity pages" but the text for that criterion states:
 * "An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead. (See Deletion of vanity articles for further guidance on this criterion)."
 * The Deletion of vanity articles policy states:
 * "Only those articles where there is no remotely plausible assertion of notability should be considered for Wikipedia:Speedy deletion."
 * Speedy deletions (Advice for administrators) states:
 * "Check talk pages, page history, what links here (especially for potentially controversial user pages), etc. If there is a dispute over whether the page should be deleted, consider first listing it on Articles for deletion"

I'm not going to go to the mat for this article -- it was pretty marginal. My point is not to bust your chops but to give some feedback; it's the process used here that I'm concerned with.

Having said all this, I also understand there's a consensus (with good reason) to encourage new page patrollers to work efficiently at the occasional expense of precision: --A. B. 16:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy deletions (Advice for administrators) also notes
 * "Don't worry too much — new pages patrol is unpleasant, and people will make mistakes. Speedy deletion patrol goes through the deletion logs to catch stuff that shouldn't have been speedied, without rancor or excessive red tape. Feel free to be efficient!"
 * ... or as Jimbo Wales put it:
 * "... it's _ok_ for people doing newpages patrol (especially) to err in the defense of quality, and that resurrecting a few things here and there behind them is a small price to pay for avoiding another Seigenthaler incident."
 * I second A. B.'s concerns expressed above. Rklawton 19:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above comments - I added the template, and in light of the other comments that soon appeared on the article's talk page, I thought it merited discussion before deletion. Could you at least give your reasons for your decision? -- Tivedshambo (talk) 19:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Staxringold, thanks for your help! I think PROD is very fair.


 * Regards, --A. B. 00:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S., I dislike leaving such long messages on other folks' user pages cluttering things up, so feel free to delete my message above. (I'm shy about deleting stuff -- even my own -- when it's on someone else's talk page.) --A. B. 00:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)