User talk:Sue Rangell/Archives/Thursday 13th of December 2012 07:19:29 AM

Prieuré de Sion... erm, House of du Souich
Hi Sue,

Thanks for the message. Yep, this is why WP:NPP is so important. It's big and impressive, and it's a complete load of, ahem, bullocks. (Just above your message is an apology for a CSD tagging for a very non-hoaxical Danish ichthyologist. It's actually up for deletion at  Åge Vedel Tåning.  I hope it gets kept - it's the second article in a language I don't speak that I've started: see Kretzoi Miklós.)

I'll go through the references a bit later on to see if I can clarify why it's nonexistent. More than pleased to get a barnstar of course, but that one always reminds me of the Newcastle Knights.

--Shirt58 (talk) 02:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Sue, you are going a little over the top in your comments. You need to extend a bit more assumption of good faith to our French colleagues.  Spinning Spark  22:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your concern, but the simple fact is that the article is a hoax. saying so isn't going over the top. I am not assuming bad faith when I point out that the single issue IP editors have been repeatedly warned and blocked for bad behavior. There is nothing there. The bad faith on their part is real and exists. The article is a hoax propelled by single issue IP editors who have been repeatedly admonished for their actions. Pointing that out isn't being "over the top" in my humble opinion, and I believe that I have been polite. If these astroturfers feel that they are being unfairly treated, they are free to go to the arbitration committee. I understand what you are trying to do, and I appreciate it. You are a good wikipedian. Thank you and be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 22:58, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

This WP:HOAX has finally been deleted from Wikipedia both in the English and French Wikipedias, see HERE, and the sockpuppeteer blocked. Another victory over sockpuppetry, astroturfing, and spam. That's it. The end. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 23:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Third Option by Derek Gunn
Hello Sue Rangell. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Third Option by Derek Gunn, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''G4 speedy declined - this is not substantially identical to the previously deleted version. Deletion reasons - copyvio and promotion, no longer apply.''' It's a pain, and it would be nice if there were an "absolutely non-notable book" speedy, but there isn't, and if we are trying to get this newbie to understand the rules, we need to play by them ourselves. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * You are correct of course. I really hate this wikilawyering tho. Maybe this is one of those WP:IGNOREALLRULES situations that I thought I'd never encouter, LOL. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

AfD Space Empire Elite
Hi, Sue Rangell. From your recent comment at Articles for deletion/Space Empire Elite I think that you think that I was disagreeing with you. What I meant to argue was that Kirkman's suggestion, "It was one of the most popular games played on Atari ST BBSes," is irrelevant to GNG (and notability more generally). Timing doesn't matter, but neither does subjective popularity. Sorry if I was unclear. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 06:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

OH MY! Thank you for bring this up, I did think that you were disagreeing! I completely read it wrong. I had to re-read it twice before I read it correctly. My bad. Sometimes the written word doesn't translate so well. I really appreciate this. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Your signature
Normally I don't much like multicoloured signatures, but I have to admit that yours is unusually tasteful! Keep up the good work. Jowa fan (talk) 05:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you very, very much! I wanted something that would make it easy to find my own comments in large threads, but not something that was completely in-your-face, something subtle. :) --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Toronto goth scene
Hello Sue, just letting you know I removed the prod from the above article as it was previously listed at articles for deletion. Thank you. Rotten regard 22:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Was it? Ok, Thank you very much! --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉  23:12, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tokyo Girl
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tokyo Girl. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oops...I thought it was somebody's user talk page. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 04:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

AWB
Hi. I have approved your request. Happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

AFD
Thanks for trying to help with DOGA afd discussion, I agree with the snow keep decisions. It seems you have not followed the non admin Afd closing protocol. Till you know how to close xFds or until you have a mentor watching your work please avoid closing xfd. BO &#124; Talk 01:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC) BO &#124; Talk 01:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I am sorry that you feel that way about me closing your AfD. Please do not take it personally. But since every single entry was for a Keep, as can be clearly seen in the AfD HERE, I am sure that it was closed in good order. I have never had an admin complain about any of my closures. If one ever does, I will consider your suggestions. Happy editing. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:53, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I would agree with Sue here. I'm seeing nothing at all problematic about this closure. Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C) 03:14, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Avaya Application Server 5300/prods
Hello, just stopping by to let you know that a couple of prods that you added with a bot didn't have a reason (Choralerna and Hua Chan Su) I think I fixed them but you may want to check to make sure I caught your intent. Cheers Illia Connell (talk) 01:16, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I really appreciate it! I don't normally make such errors, but real-world issues were working at me today, plus I've been suffering from a lack of coffee :) Thanks for the fixes! Be well --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 01:27, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Sue, you forgot to add a reason for deletion to the above prod. Cheerio Rotten regard 00:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I just noticed all your recent prods don't have deletion reasons, can you add some please. Thanks Rotten regard 00:23, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Most of them have also previously been listed at AfD so a prod isn't eligible. Rotten regard 00:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Did I miss some? I thought I de-prodded the ones that were listed for deletion previously. As for the mass of Avaya product pages, I just feel that they are not notable, just like the other similar Avaya product pages deleted. Thanks for the heads-up. This is what I get for skipping coffee again, lol. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 00:41, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Help clean Cal Poly Pomona
Hi, Sue Rangell

I noticed that you are involved in cleaning Cal Poly. I think these pages need to be deleted or merged. I need your input.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronco_Pep_Band (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cal_Poly_Pomona_presidents (merge with List of Cal Poly Pomona people) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Poly_Universities_Rose_Float (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronco_Student_Center (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_California_Marine_Institute (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poly_Post (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Poly_Pomona_Broncos (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Poly_Pomona_Broncos_men%27s_basketball (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Poly_Pomona_University_Library (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLA_Building (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._K._Kellogg_Arabian_Horse_Center (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Poly_Universities_Rose_Float (delete) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Polytechnic_University,_Pomona_academics#Agriculture_.288.29 (delete/merge)

Thanks, --Fredthecleaner (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you!! I will dive right into this in a few minutes! --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:37, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I could not find any pages that required deletion in my opinion. However I did find a few that could probably do with a merge, and I commented such on the appropriate talk pages. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to help. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree with you. Commenting on the talk pages is good, but I think placing delete nominations on those pages would be better, since only a very few people check those pages. Thanks again, --Fredthecleaner (talk) 21:09, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I think Mrfrobinson is a sockpuppet--Fredthecleaner (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The proper action to take, if you suspect a sockpuppet is to file a request to investigate here at Sockpuppet_investigations. You will be expected to provide clear, unambiguous evidence, such as a diff page. The admins who do this work are not magicians or sorcerers, they are regular people like you or I, and need something to go on. So make sure you have good reasons for your suspicions. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:27, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * FYI, User:Fredthecleaner has just been blocked as a sockpuppet. See Sockpuppet investigations/Mangoeater1000.  72Dino (talk) 23:11, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Very interesting news. Thank you very much. Between User:Fredthecleaner and Mrfrobinson, I am wasting a lot of valuable time today. Thanks for the heads-up. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 23:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ones opinion does not always constitute a waste of time...I want to just put it out there that today wasn't something personal or to waste your time, my opinion of policy is mine and just like you am entitled to it. I am just trying to advocate you to exercise caution in certain circumstances, if you feel that is a waste of time that is your opinion. Have a great night! :) Mrfrobinson (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Also go read the comment Fredthecleaner made about me...its funny he thinks I am "too strong. HELP me subdue him". Mrfrobinson (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Genealogical relationships of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom
As this article says "This page is intended to reflect the page Genealogical relationships of Presidents of the United States." I am notifying all those who !voted in the AfD for that article about this AfD discussion. Dougweller (talk) 21:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

== Night of the Day of the Dawn of the Son of the Bride of the Return of the Revenge of the Terror of the Attack of the Evil, Mutant, Alien, Flesh Eating, Hellbound, Zombified Living Dead Part 2: In Shocking 2-D ==

I removed your PROD tag on that since it has already been through AfD (see the talk page). I don't have an opinion on your rationale itself, just a procedural removal. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:57, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh thank you very much! I wonder why it didn't show? Anyway it is nice to meet you! --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 03:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Organism
Hi Ms Rangell, I'm on the annual seaside holdiay and decideed to go to a library to visit Wikipedia. There was a letter from you (before I signed in) saying you removed an edit I did on an organism article. I have never done such an edit nor have I even looked at that article. As I am typing from a library in Kiama perhaps someone on this library computer did?Foofbun (talk) 03:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

db-g1
FYI: db-g1 is for keyboard mashing. If it can be read, probably should use something else. It's been changed to db-a7. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 03:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

It says "Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history." looks like you are correct! Thanks for the heads-up, Jim. (it wasn't much better than keyboard mashing tho) hehe --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 03:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: Your recent BCE revert
Dear Sue Rangell! Thank you for your kind notice at my talk page! I do appreciate it, indeed! Q: ''Why did you undo my recent BCE "contributions, such as the one (..) Tutankhamun"? Why don't you consider it constructive?'' Please consider my minor BCE-edits an edit of good faith! My motivation was to change the christian statement of faith, which underlies the BC / AD notions, into a more universal one, for en:wikipedia is not for Christian recipients only - nor a Christian platform for the unrefined propagation of faith! (I would say BC fits perfectly in with Christiandome related articles!) While I never touch any christian related wikipedia article with BC->BCE edits, the ancient egyptian Tutankhamun is simply not related to Christiandome anyhow, so I consider my BCE edits very constructive - as a means to alleviate it from it's christian 'BC'-bias! Pls. kindly notice further, that BCE could be dually read as : #1 Before Christian Era and #2 Before Comon Era, something which does not need to offend Christians anyway! (But why it does? I would say, because it is a weaker form of propaganda of the Xtian faith!) In contrast, to state BC, which means Before Christ, is simply an expression of faith, which is false in a neutral point of view and does not apply - at least to me, Muslims, Jews and Buddhists .... In my religion/faith, there are a lot of Christs: King David and King Cyrus, to mention a few! Why- you may ask. Both could be titled Christ, which is latin for Messiah, which is greek for 'anointed one', because they are 'anointed one's indeed! You may ask what the heck does before christ mean anyway, then, outside a christian context. The BC / AD notions bear the implicit cultural christian information of before the christian Christ - almost lost in it's traditional christian use -, because Judaism does reject Jesus as a jewish messiah since more than 2000 bloody years now. Ask some Christians how many Christs are in the bible, they certainly will get it false: Jesus, while in fact there are many more Christs mentioned in the bible! ( There is not only the president of USA, Obama, France also has it's own president.) O.K. Sue -- I will now redo my BCE edit - just this one time again - with an added reference and citation, I think fits in the article, and you may undo it to BC - if you still consider it unconstructive, consensus? Thank you for your great engagement with en:wikipedia!! Sincerely, --Santurwoman (talk) 04:37, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, I don't edit war, but don't you think people will find this confusing? And I am not sure that this is a Wikipedia standard. Don't you think it might be a good idea to get some consensus on this? --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ff55ff 0em 0em 0.8em,#55ffff -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#ffff55 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#ffffff">Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 04:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Merge Chili burger to Chili con carne
I am letting you know that I have proposed a merge of Chili burger to Chili con carne. Being that you participated in the AfD, I'd be interested in your thoughts. The discussion is at Talk:Chili con carne. <span style="font: Tahoma, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 8pt;">&tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 15:18, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

It was suggested that Hamburger might be a better target, and I was implored to allow that as a possibility. Therefore, I've moved the discussion to Talk:Chili burger to allow for this. Please accept my apologies if it seemed that I was advocating for one solution over another. <span style="font: Tahoma, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 8pt;">&tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 16:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries! :) --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ff55ff 0em 0em 0.8em,#55ffff -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#ffff55 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#ffffff">Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 06:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of programmes broadcast by Cartoon Network (UK & Ireland)
Good close on this AFD, as it seemed clear that consensus ran for Keeping the article. But I do want to caution you not to close debates too early - this one ran 6 days, rather than the usual 8. Again, it's not a big deal, but it is something to keep in mind as you do more non-admin closures. Thanks! UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, I don't close them unless they are basically Snow Keeps. In fact, if there is even a single delete, I don't do them. --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ff55ff 0em 0em 0.8em,#55ffff -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#ffff55 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#ffffff">Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I saw the same thing was going to mention it too, good closure though. Articles that have consensus to be closed are usually closed 7 days later (Not 8 as Ultraexactzz mentioned. Sue Rangell, I also suggest using the template nac which is used on most non-admin closures. Have a good day! <span title="Shoot!" style="font-family: Mono; Cursor: crosshair;">-- Cheers, Ri l ey    22:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh wow, cool template! Exactly what I was looking for! Thank you!! You rock! --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ff55ff 0em 0em 0.8em,#55ffff -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#ffff55 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#ffffff">Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 00:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Riley, I may have misspoke - we usually close on the 8th day, such that the newest ones we would close today (Wednesday December 12th) are the ones opened on Tuesday December 4th. The ones from 7 days ago are not yet listed at Articles for deletion/Old. But we both agree, it's a good close. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Mike Nesbitt
If you have a moment, please take another look at Articles for deletion/Mike Nesbitt (American football). Numerous sources have been added to the article since you voted to "Delete." These additional sources may or may not lead you to change your mind, but you should be aware the article has changed significantly since you cast your vote. Cbl62 (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Look at an article again?
Hi! I've never asked anyone to do this for an article before, but I recently did some editing to the article for Dead Sea Products. I pretty much nuked the previous version of the article, which was fairly promotional. I'm sort of halfway about whether the article should remain even with that. I've found sources, but I'm not sure if this would do well separate from the main article. There might be a rationale for a merge from the Dead Sea salt into the product article, but I'm not totally feeling that as well. I just really wanted some more opinions on the current state of the article.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow you've done a lot of work. I am very impressed! Good job! :) --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ff55ff 0em 0em 0.8em,#55ffff -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#ffff55 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#ffffff">Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 06:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)