User talk:Tassedethe/Archive 1

Jim Simpson (disambiguation)
Hi there. I'm sure it was good faith, but just to let you know I've reverted your move. There is no "L" in "disambiguation". Cheers, --  Ka renjc 18:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks, I should have a rest if I'm doing silly things like that Tassedethe (talk) 18:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Or indeed a nice tasse de thé? (sipping mine now). -- Ka renjc 18:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

James Galvin (poet)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of James Galvin (poet), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.poets.org/poet.php/prmPID/244. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to 1981
Thank you for your edits, but please do not just unlink names from date and year articles. The main -- really, the ONLY criterion -- for people's birth and deaths to be included on these pages is that they have a Wikipedia article about them. Therefore, when you merely remove the linking to those who do not articles, as you did here, you just make it harder for them to be found and weeded out. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 14:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I see I should have removed the whole name and link. One more bit of experience added Tassedethe (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Nota bene

 * Mark Harris (musician) Chubbles (talk) 17:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * noted

Links to disambiguation pages
I've been away for a wee while, so I apologise for the delay in drawing this to your attention. I notice you have changed some hatnotes to link directly to disambiguation pages, rather than via the "xxxxxx (disambiguation)" redirect, for example James Miller (filmmaker). Similarly, you have also changed such links from dab pages themselves, for example James Miller and Jim Miller. This is not a good idea.

According to Disambiguation:

"To link to a disambiguation page (instead of a specific meaning), link to the redirect to the disambiguation page that includes the text "(disambiguation)" in the title (such as, America (disambiguation) rather than America). This helps distinguish accidental links to the disambiguation page from intentional ones. See Category:Redirects to disambiguation pages."

I think that states the reason very clearly. I would also add that "redirects are cheap", so there is no compelling reason to avoid them in this context. I see you've been doing some good work clearing up links to dab pages, so I think you'll be able to appreciate this advice. --NSH001 (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for this advice. I am discovering more things as I go along, but there are some places where the style advice is a bit vague, or contradictory. Your information was clear and I'm sorry I missed it. I did have to go and look up what a hatnote was :) Tassedethe (talk) 16:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad to be of help. There is so much small detail involved in disambiguation that no-one can absorb it all from the start. You're doing OK for a beginner. :-)
 * --NSH001 (talk) 17:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

More links to dabs on dabs
Howdy, I think this might be a repeat of earlier, but you've done some partial disambiguations on disambiguation pages. This has one minor and one major problem. The minor is a minor violation of MOS:DAB, but the major is it makes the disambig page less complete. Here is an example of your partial disambiguation and my fix: Basically a disambiguation page is supposed to list all of the guys, not just the one, so if you have to disambig an entry on a disambiguation page, you need to bring in all of them (or change the entry to something like Kenny Miller (disambiguation) instead if the list is too long).
 * Kenny Miller: [ your partial disambig] and [ my fix]

Here are some more that I have not fixed, in case you want to have a go:
 * [ Lauren Newton]
 * [ Kris Wilson]

I think most of your edits are not only good, but also show you understand the point of disambiguation pages (a very good thing). Thanks for your hard work! JackSchmidt (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. As I'm using the popups tool I get into a bit of a routine and don't notice when the page I am editing is special in some way (e.g also a dab page). But as you've pointed this out I will take a bit of extra care.Tassedethe (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Dab cleanup tag
I have noticed that you have recently tagged many dab pages for cleanup. In reviewing these tags, I have found many pages which have required only a few minutes of work in order to fix. Might I encourage you to go ahead and fix these pages as you find them rather than taking the time to tag them for someone else to fix later? Seriously, I have fixed several of these pages in less than 30 seconds, which makes me wonder whether it wouldn't take almost as long to tag them as to fix them. If you are not familiar with the guidelines for cleaning up disambiguation pages, they can be found at MOS:DAB. Please don't take offense - I have found your contributions very helpful. I'm just trying to improve our efficiency at dab repair. SlackerMom (talk) 21:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I realise this but it's one of those things - I'm trying to identify mistagged dab pages, not spend time cleaning them up. And although some might take only a short time to do, its often the extra work involved, checking birthdates, checking for other instances etc, that adds to the time. I will modify what I do for the minor cleanup pages - perhaps just add them to my own watch list and clean them later. Thanks for your input Tassedethe (talk) 07:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for not taking offense. I had second thoughts after writing that message that I might have sounded peevish.  I do understand why you're doing what you're doing.  My selfish concern is that the list of dab pages needing cleanup will get so long as to be overwhelming.  (See my note here.) Thanks for all your good work. SlackerMom (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Dabbing
Hi. And keep up the good work! This diff may well be the only place you've done it, but when dabbing with popups it's all too easy to mis-aim – said from personal experience :-( It doesn't take that much longer to have a quick look to check that what you've done is what you meant to do, before going on to the next one. cheers (and again, please keep up the good work, it's much appreciated), Struway2 (talk) 13:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * thanks for pointing that out, I'll just have to keep my eyes peeled Tassedethe (talk) 13:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
You continue to rule. Thanks for fixing up so many surname pages I have on my watchlist. JackSchmidt (talk) 17:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. Unfortunately (as you must know) I have about 10 times more on my watchlist that I just can't face tackling! Tassedethe (talk) 17:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

A Study in Scarlet (1914 film)
Hello. Thanks for ensuring all the original links where updated following your page move. Some editors don't seem to bother fixing the links!  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome; I know they say 'be bold' but there's no need to leave more of a mess behind. Tassedethe (talk) 11:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Do You Love Me
I see that you put a musical called Do You Love Me on the disamb page of the same name (I happened to have that page in my watchlist). I don't know if you were also planning to create the article, but that doesn't seem like a good idea. Did a google search, and I don't think it is notable enough for WP. But I might be wrong of course ;-). Feel free to create it if you think otherwise. In the meantime, I have changed the entry into an external link. Cheers, Face 14:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Notability wasn't for me to decide, it was linked (incorrectly in some cases) from several other pages so as per WP:MOSDAB it should be on the dab page. It definitely shouldn't be an external link though, so I'll put that as a hidden comment. I think it would class as notable if tested, Maureen O'Hara is a pretty big movie star, plus it is listed in both my Halliwell and Maltin (2.5 stars out of 4) film guides. There'd be a lot more movies removed from these pages if that wasn't enough :) Tassedethe (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Robert Seymour (illustrator)
Hi Tassedethe.

I've tried to direct/re-direct Robert Seymour from Pickwick and Dickens to a new article; [Robert Seymour 1897-1836]. But, I'm a newcommer to Wiki, and cannot re-link this article to your [Robert Seymour (illustrator)&/or (Robert Seymour disambiguation?) Any editing assistance would be most helpful. Thanks and many regards.Stephen2nd (talk) 16:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry I haven't been able to find the article [Robert Seymour 1897-1836]. Is it on the wiki already? Personally I don't like having birthdates in the title, but some people do so I suppose it's OK. However they should definitely be the other way round! i.e Robert Seymour 1836-1897. The easiest way to start your new article is go to the page Robert Seymour and edit that page so the line now reads: * Robert Seymour 1836-1897, illustrator of work by Charles Dickens When you save that page then that will be a redlink (unless the page is already there, but as I say I couldn't find it), click on the redlink, and you should be able to add your text then. I hope that helps. Tassedethe (talk) 16:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again. My mistakes (wrong dates & could'nt figure out re-direct &c) But, I did a copy/paste from my old R.S.(1798-1836) to your R.S. (illustrator) then deleted the old text (but not the old title?), which seems to have worked. I shall be attempting to upload artworks next (eek!). Thanks for your advice and kind assistance, much appreciated.Stephen2nd (talk) 00:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Bruce Fraser
Would you take a minute to re-visit a recent edit of the disambiguation page for Bruce Fraser? As you may know, the British honours and decorations system is conventionally evidenced by postnominal acronmyns. In this instance, both men would have been called "Sir Bruce," but one was a Knight Commander of the Order of St. Michael and St. George and the other was a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath. I'm wondering about two issues: (1) What specifically at WP:MOSDAB informed your decision-making here? and (2) Could this be one of those rare cases in which a very narrowly tailored exception to those guidelines might need to be considered?

More specifically, the version you edited looked like this
 * Bruce Fraser could refer to:
 * Bruce Fraser, 1st Baron Fraser of North Cape, KBE, KMG -- Admiral of the Fleet
 * Bruce Fraser (civil servant), KCB -- career bureaucrat and humourist

I am assuming that you removed the postnomials because the acronymns were conventionally linked; but would your attention have been flagged if there had not been multiple links on a disambiguation page -- as in, for example:
 * Bruce Fraser, 1st Baron Fraser of North Cape, KBE, KMG -- Admiral of the Fleet
 * Bruce Fraser (civil servant), KCB -- career bureaucrat and humourist

In this context, what abou this: Naming conventions (names and titles)? I would have thought this relevant -- possibly helpful, but not dispositive.

Do you see my point? --Tenmei (talk) 13:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I do. Usually the bio on the dab is where the disambiguation takes place i.e. in this case one is an admiral and one is a civil servant so no possibility of confusion there. The relevant phrase on WP:MOSDAB is "...only enough descriptive information that the reader can distinguish between different people with the same name." I'd have to say that it would be the rare person indeed that would know that the Sir Bruce Fraser they were interested in was a KMG not a KCB, but didn't know if they were an admiral or a civil servant. But you're right that it was the linking especially that drew my attention, I would probably have left your second layout alone. I'll add the honorifics back in, hopefully then we have a good compromise Tassedethe (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Tassedethe -- This was never an a priori question of compromise. It was immediately clear to me that your edit was an improvement -- no question whatsoever; but your fine-tuning did cause me to realize that at some point, when the non-America-centric aspects of Wikipedia have been developed more fully, this may become one of those issues I'd want to pursue.  For me, this curious error is only in the process of evolving into a plausible issue.  Mine was truly an academic question; and your response has given me something worthwhile to ponder .... Also, I suppose, my follow-up was an attempt to fix the issues in hand so that I'd be less likely to make similar mistakes in future.  Thanks for the feedback. --Tenmei (talk) 19:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Nick Douglas and Charles Foster (disambiguation)
Well, I've reverted Charles Foster for you. Your version looks just fine. You're up against an irritating editor - you can usually get a feel for someone's experience by checking their talk page or contributions and this IP has the look of a pest. Sometimes I just ignore the page for a while and then change it back when the troublemaker has lost interest! If all else fails, you can leave vandalism warnings on their talk page. As for Nick Douglas, I think I'd leave it as it is. The linked articles do have content about these guys, so I think it's worth the dab. You might add a description for the first one that mentions the publication. Other than that, I think it's fine. I can see lots of good editing from you on my watchlist. It's nice to have trustworthy names pop up there! SlackerMom (talk) 13:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Big City
Hi. I was wondering, why did you remove the link to director Tod Browning on Big City and then add one to the director for the movie you listed?--Flash176 (talk) 16:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You need to look at the style manual WP:MOSDAB. The relevant bits are "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link. To avoid confusing the reader, do not wikilink any other words in the line.". So that is why I took out your link to Tod Browning, as that would be 2 blue links for that entry. The other relevant bit is "Red links should not be the only link in a given entry; link also to an existing article, so that a reader (as opposed to a contributing editor) will have somewhere to navigate to for additional information." So any redlink on a dab page must have a corresponding blue link, which is why the link to Norman Taurog is there.  The style page also explains the rationale for redlink inclusion. I normally put a link to the style page in my edit summary but I neglected to in this case. I hope that is all clear. Tassedethe (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, thanks for explaining that to me. Learn something new everyday. :)--Flash176 (talk) 17:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Complicated chemistry redlinks
Your attention to the links at Diglucosyl diacylglycerol synthase and Ganglioside galactosyltransferase is appreciated.

Could you also have a look at Lipid-A-disaccharide synthase, Mannotetraose 2-alpha-N-acetylglucosaminyltransferase, Monosialoganglioside sialyltransferase, Xyloglucan-specific exo-beta-1,4-glucanase, Polyurethane ( N'-(3-dimethylamino)propyl)-N,N-dimethyl-1,3-propanediamine ), and Ron Lauback?

I apologise if this makes it seem like I'm taking you for granted. Isn't there a saying that the only certain reward for doing good work is to be offered more work to do? —Paul A (talk) 03:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I did the first 4, the 5th one is fine, although my naming software couldn't cope with that name and came up with 3-(dimethylamino-propyl-amino)-N,N-dimethyl-propan-1-amine, the ref doesn't seem to have that compound so I can't be certain that's correct. The Ron Lauback page is bizarre - the HPLC paper just comes out of left field. I just took out the link, I can't imagine it'll be missed (or ever completed). The website of the journal is down so I can't check it.


 * I'm sure I'll get my reward in heaven :) Tassedethe (talk) 07:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! Are you sure that fifth one is fine, though? It's got more ) than it has (. I found it in the ref, and have placed the missing (. Thanks again for your help. —Paul A (talk) 08:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't spot that at all. I can stop patting myself on the back for a job well done. Tassedethe (talk) 08:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Malplaced dabs
Thank you for reporting malplaced disambiguation pages. FYI, I added the db-movedab template to each of the 8 pages you reported today, and an admin fixed all of them within an hour or so. You might want to try doing this the next time you come across one of these pages. --Russ (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I never knew about that template, it'll be useful Tassedethe (talk) 07:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Steven H Silver
You recently moved the article Steven H Silver to Steven H. Silver. In this case, there is no period following the H in the middle name. COuld you please move it back where it belongs? Shsilver (talk) 12:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. H is the middle name, it just isn't an abbreviation for anything. 63.150.87.244 (talk) 13:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If you add that info to the article that would be useful, although only an admin can move the page in the future as I made a 2nd edit to the H. page.Tassedethe (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Your revert of SUV (disambiguation)
SUV is a fairly recent acronym that has been invented by a specific group of people (here industries interested in selling products for commercial profits). Another group of people (here: environmentally aware people interested in reducing environmental pollution and danger to life caused by overly large automobiles) have dubbed the fresh acronym SUV with a series of other meanings including "Super Ugly Vehicle, Stupid Useless Vehicle, Sport Useless Vehicle, Super useless vehicle, Sucky Useless Vehicle, or Seriously Ugly Vehicle" (see also Urban Dictionary). From an encyclopedic, neutral point of view it would make sense to not redirect SUV directly to the article on Sport utility vehicles but to SUV (disambiguation). Instead of just reverting your revert I wanted to ask you whether with this extra information you would consider to revert your revert? Best regards, --Tschirl (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting, and I understand where you are coming from. I have no love for SUVs myself, but I think this is just wishful thinking. While it might be interesting to see if you can persuade people that SUV should stand for Super Useless Vehicle etc it is not right that Wikipedia is used to give this legitimacy, or undue prominence. In the same way a dictionary should note how people use words not how they, the dictionary, think people should use words, nor how a minority think people should use words. If you could show that the use of SUV for Super Useless Vehicle was common outside of a small group of environmentally aware people, that people used the two interchangeably, then I could see the argument for pointing SUV to the dab page. The NPOV argument doesn't really hold, see WP:UNDUE. As a further point, I googled "Super Useless Vehicle" and got 31 hits. I also googled "Biased Broadcasting Corporation" and got 1650 hits, but I don't think you could argue that BBC should not point to the broadcasting company. Good luck anyway Tassedethe (talk) 12:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

McPherson
No. I and an admin both agreed the first leader of the SA Labor Party, 1891-97, is more noteable than the footballer and US senator. Timeshift (talk) 15:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Federal and AFAIK all state Labor leaders that came first started as the junior partner in a governing coalition, that's what Labor did 1891-1910 in federal and many state. That does not make the first leaders of Australian Labor parties less noteable. Also, one way I look at it is that out of the four McPhersons, who was the highest in their field? Labor leader is the head of a party, and the only party to survive from then until now making it the oldest, state and federally. First is just the icing on the cake. A US Senator, a scottish footballer, a Canadian MP/MLA, whoop de doop - they are nobodies who weren't leaders of anything. As for the discussion I don't recall where it would be - regardless I do not need to prove myself. I have nothing to answer for. Timeshift (talk) 15:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

John Durbin
Hiya. Yes you may find that this article would not survive a deletion debate at WP:AFD so if you feel it should be deleted then it's best to start a discussion on it. I declined it becuase he appears to have been in some notable productions, which would indicate that A7 doesn't apply. However as notability is not inherited it simply means the article falls out of the stricter speedy criterion. Let me know if you need a hand setting up the AFD or whatever! Pedro : Chat  09:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. A7 is one of the tightest criteria. Even one decent reference can be an "assertion of notability" even if there is nothing in the article text. A weeak assertion of notability on whatever way never means that the article will certainly survive - it just means we need a proper debate. Thanks for your understanding, and happy editing. Pedro : Chat  12:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

William Duer
Please reconsider. I asked for the article to be moved because it was unnecessarily hard for me to find. William Duer the grandfather is tolerably well known, indeed notorious; the grandson is a two-term congressman, with (AFAICT) nothing else notable at all. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

James Thompson
Hi. I notice you've done some work on James Thompson. One of the major changes you've made is to the order of entries, and indeed the list seemed to be in no particular order before, which was not good. You've referred to WP:MOSDAB as your guideline, but I can't see anything there which explicitly covers the order of entries in cases like this, so I'll carry on discussing it in the spirir of WP:COMMON (or even WP:IAR!). Having the list in precise alphabetic order of the wikipedia article, which is what you seem to have done, is a bit self-defeating, since if people knew the precise name of the article, they wouldn't need the dab page. What I've done in similar cases before is to give the list in order of birth date (approximately where necessary). People searching for an article on a person usually have at least a vague idea of when they llived, so should then be able to identify their man without too much trouble, whereas they could easily give up in despair on "James", not realising he's there as "Jimmy", or vice versa. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with you changing the order. I added a few names and as it appeared to be approximately alphabetical already so I just continued with that. WP:MOSDAB mentions having the most important articles first, but with names that's difficult, one person's important is another's "never heard of". Tassedethe (talk) 15:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. Done it. I'd be happy if you pointed out or corrected any mistakes. Happier still if there aren't any. (The omission of James Thomson without the p is deliberate.)SamuelTheGhost (talk) 15:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice job. Only one minor thing, there should be only 1 blue link on each line - so for the single bio I chose the link that referred to the person. Personally I don't like to see comments about layout visible to the reader - it's like showing your underwear :) But then that's all the fashion these days. I prefer them as comments visible only to editors. But I never change such things unless overhauling the page - it's a bit too much like nit-picking. Tassedethe (talk) 16:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Corn (disambiguation)
Hi. This morning I made a biggish edit to Corn (disambiguation). It's been reverted for reasons I don't understand. Knowing your interest in dab pages, could you have a look? Thanks SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The editor concerned has apologised and clarified, so I'm feeling better. It might still interest you, though, as there as some awkward decisions involved in the corn case. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's nice to wake and find it has all been settled in my absence. Tassedethe (talk) 07:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Prestige Academy of Motion Pictures
Good find. I did some research based upon your discovery and believe you have uncovered a puppet and his sock. Please see my comments at the AfD. I have suggested a speedy and salt.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Move from MP to PPC on Yeardot
Hiya, I disagree with your change to Yeardot. The person you've changed has already actually secured the Labour party's nomination and as such she has attained the goal of becoming the PPC and her goal now is to become an MP. Perhaps you can change it back? Thanks! fr33kman (talk) 21:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As it previously stated 'Labour MP for Skipton and Ripon' that is completely wrong as it suggests she is the MP. I will change it to 'Labour candidate for MP for ...'. I have to admit I had a different meaning for PPC in my mind. Tassedethe (talk) 07:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies. I have now read the heading on the table! I will return it to MP. Tassedethe (talk) 07:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Frank Clark
Hi, I noticed you merged the "Frank Clark" and "Frank Clarke" dab pages together. I agree it is neater than this method that I've seen before. But I was just wondering how you decided on which way round to do the merge? Is 'Clarke' more common? I want to make sure I'm following a consistent approach if I come across similar disambig pages. Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 12:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I expanded the Frank Clark page before realising the Frank Clarke page existed, and that page already had the Frank Clarks listed, so it was not really a merge more of an update with the new (footballer) tag and some extra dates. There are no hard and fast rules about merging similar names. I tend to go with the the full name if possible e.g Andrew not Andy, or James not Jim. But if there are far more Andys than Andrews I would put it at Andy Surname. For very similar surnames I would again go with the most common (ie most common on Wikipedia not most common in the world), as there were equal Clarks and Clarkes in this case I could have chosen either but as I say the Frank Clarke one was pretty complete already. I really dont like that Kenneth Clark(e) (disambiguation) form, although it does have the benefit of being pretty clear. The only other caveat is not to merge similar names if the resulting page would be very large, but again there are no rules on how large. Tassedethe (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Arsenal (disambiguation)
Thanks for putting the template back. I removed it altogether by accident. E_dog95'  Hi ' 22:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem; nice job on the cleanup, thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 07:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Robert Clark
Yes, you're quite correct. I just couldn't make up my mind which to not link, so I linked both. How did you decide which one to unlink? (In any case, it shouldn't matter, because it really is about time somebody created an article on him!) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:07, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was a bit sloppy and didn't check which had most info on him. I knew that the kane one was OK (as I'd edited the page b4), and when confronted by 2 links I usually go for the less generic link. Looking more closely I see that that the Chief Defence Scientist page has a reference on him that contains far more information. (The choice should always be to a page that would give the reader more info - when words like say Australian or scientist are linked this is of no use at all.) I will swap the blue links over. You're right though, he clearly needs his own page. Tassedethe (talk) 14:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request

 * Many thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 14:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

not again :( Tassedethe (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC) }}


 * Many thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 07:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Carlos Torres
Hi, just wondering why you have deleted the disambiguation entry regarding Carlos Alberto Torres, the Puerto Rican prisoner -- he is not the same person as the Brazilian football player -- and what would be necessary for the listing to be permitted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justiciasocial (talk • contribs) 14:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As there is already a Carlos Alberto Torres then a new entry would have to be something like Carlos Alberto Torres (prisoner). However this person must either have a page or also feature somewhere else on Wikipedia. Details about which redlinks are allowed on disambiguation pages are at MOS:DABRL. If he doesn't already exist then I (and any other editor) would remove the entry as there is no proof of notability. I see he is listed at this page Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (Puerto Rico) so if you edit that to point to Carlos Alberto Torres (prisoner) it will be acceptable to add the page to Carlos Torres. Tassedethe (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The Ballet of Change: Piccadilly Circus
I replied to you at the AfD... but something strange is going on. When I myself look at this or go to WikiProject Deletion sorting/Film and scoll down... my comment is invisible. But when I go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ballet of Change: Piccadilly Circus or this, they are visible again. It shouldn't make a difference. Very strange...  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I assume there must be lag or something, I can see your comments. Tassedethe (talk) 08:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. It is the freakiest thing I have ever come across.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

SBU Inc / James Gibson dabs
Sorry about those - I put the dabs in before I had the reference right, and I'm still putting together the references and the page that establish notability. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 17:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'm afraid so many people never actually create those pages I tend to cull them as soon as I see them. I only commented out the entry on James Gibson as it did look like there was a possibility that it would be created. Tassedethe (talk) 19:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. I'm trying to get the right sequence of events so that I can add some incremental bit of information without triggering negative reviews; it would have been better to redlink those names on the right article pages first, and then create the actual stub page, and then add the dabs, and then fill out the stub.  Edward Vielmetti (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You can add an tag to the top of the wiki page when you start it. This should hold off all but the most zealous editors, provided of course there is some obvious claim to notability that just needs expanding/better referencing etc. Good luck. Tassedethe (talk) 20:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Joshua Kopel
I deprodded Joshua Kopel, he's in the grey territory between notable and non-notable, and deserves a hearing at AfD. He also deserves an opportunity for other editors to beef up the article. Feel free to send it to AfD after a few weeks. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fine. I should have tagged for notability when I edited the article last month. I'll allow some time to pass and then go to AfD. Tassedethe (talk) 07:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Edward Collins
Hi, I see you moved Edward Collins to a disambig page which is fine. In future, please remember to change the talk page from a redirect to a DisambigPage and to add a dablink on the moved page. Tx, Snappy56 (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Blue link
Why remove blue link? i thought disambigs were allowed 1 blue link... Ryan 4314  (talk) 15:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The 1 blue link is the actual article, in this case Barry Wilson (Royal Navy officer). If the article is a redlink, then the 1 blue link is there to provide further info (e.g Barry Wilson (naval), first captain of HMS Cardiff). Hope that's clear. Tassedethe (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Mitchell
I'm puzzled. Why did you change all the  "xxx Mitchell (disambiguation)" entries to "xxx Mitchell (disambiguation)" ? It looks like a lot of work, and it doesn't seem to have achieved anything. Further, you've changed a lot of direct links to pages into links to redirects to the same pages. That seems like a retrograde step. Clearly, I'm missing something. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It wasn't too much work, tabbed browsing and a clipboard manager etc. The relevant bit is at WP:INTDABLINK, basically if you are deliberately linking to a dab page you should link to it via a xxx (disambiguation) redirect. This ensures that anyone cleaning up links to dab pages (i.e. this project Disambiguation pages with links) can see that the link is intentional. Tassedethe (talk) 14:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Valerie Wilson
Well, much to my surprise, the NY lottery is one of the few that does not, apparently, have a Wikipedia article. So I am going to write one. But info is lacking--even the NY Lottery's page (unlike other lotteries that I viewed) does not have a history subpage. So I am working on it, but it may be a bit longer than I expected. Unschool (talk) 23:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Tassedethe (talk) 08:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I created the article on the New York Lottery, but I'm not happy with it. Most of the info I derived from an email that the NY Lottery sent me in reply to my inquiry, and I can't figure our how to use it as a cite.  So then I read over your comments again and saw the suggestion about the town, which turned out to be an even better idea.  So, how's this now? Unschool (talk) 04:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's excellent. Thanks for taking the time to do that. Tassedethe (talk) 07:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Typo redirect G.P. Eggers
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on G.P. Eggers, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because G.P. Eggers is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting G.P. Eggers, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Message moved from top of page
You appear to be hell bent by not allowing my site information to be displayed under the name William McDougall. The information that was there (pertaining to me) had been there for several months and I had discussed the contents of my entry with others from en.wikipedia.org and there didn’t appear to be any problems. As I have said before, you have site entries of people who are just radio personalities or other non-important individuals, so I felt that I had accomplishments and being my name is also William McDougall,  I would include myself and my accomplishments to the site. Everything that I had included is correct, verifiable and could be useful information for others including my arson analysis link. I do not profit monetarily from my site information.

Arson Analysis Presentaton: http://www.forensic.to/webhome/arson/arson%20slides%20and%20Instrumentation%20theory%20%2012-20-05_files/frame.htm

When viewing my arson analysis presentation from above, the first three introduction slides and slide # 13 (chromatography) plus the rest of the slides will upload without delay. the other slides, #4-12 are photographic slides that are sometimes delayed. The photographic slides are not necessary for viewing the presentation (108 slides).


 * I'm not sure why you are adding this information to this page. As I said you should start a separate article if you feel you are notable. Tassedethe (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

You told me that a person doesn't write his own history or story.


 * The best place to request an article be written is at Requested articles/Biographies. Tassedethe (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

O.O.O.D. restored
This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at Deletion review. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Articles for deletion. -- lucasbfr  talk 12:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

John Young
Hello. I can't understand this reversion. Can you leave an explanation of why on my talk page, please?--Mathematiquizard 20:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Ruben Castillo
Hello, Tassedethe. You were so helpful awhile back in creating a disambiguation page for Allen Snyder. I was wondering: could you help me create one for Ruben Castillo? There are two equally well-known Ruben Castillos out there: one is the boxer, and the other is a U.S. district judge. Right now the boxer's article is just "Ruben Castillo" (as opposed to "Ruben Castillo (boxer)"), while the judge's article (which I just created) is created as "Ruben Castillo (judge)". I was thinking that a disambiguation page could be created for the name Ruben Castillo (and I've unfortunately forgotten how to do that), and then the boxer's biography could be converted to "Ruben Castillo (boxer)." What do you think. Do feel free to reply at my talk page, or here; whichever one you prefer. Thanks! User talk:Jarvishunt. —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC).
 * I did that for you. Tassedethe (talk) 05:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much, Tassedethe. You are the best!  Thanks again!  User talk:Jarvishunt  —Preceding undated comment was added at 14:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC).

infobox help

 * Hey, I tried to help out, but I failed. I'm sure someone will get back to you with an answer soon though.  Sorry, 2help (talk) 16:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure it's possible. Looking at the definitions of the Template:Infobox Sports league, it looks like there's no way around it. I'm keeping the helpme template open just in case someone else has a better suggestion.
 * Cheers,  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  18:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Umm.. that is what you're getting. When I look at the infobox I see 2001, which is 2001 . Roux
 * Thanks for attempts. The current edit i.e 2001 not 2001? is the only thing I could get to work - which unfortunately loses the '?', the query to the founding of the club. Tassedethe (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm missing something... what exactly is it that you're trying to do? [ roux  ] [ x ] 18:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The page (as I found it) had the Infobox parameter 'Founded' set to 2001? (i.e. with a question mark), which was rendered as 2001? a redlink. I wanted to be able to have a blue link to 2001? retaining the question mark, to show the query on the founding date. This edit shows how it was. Tassedethe (talk) 19:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There's some validation in one of the sources that in 2000 the top league was called "Super" while in 2001 the top one was "Premier", so the educated guess was probably correct and should be kept unless contested.
 * Cheers,  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  19:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I have come across redlinks in infoboxes before caused by a similar problem - I thought I'd ask this time to see if there was some magic bit of code to overrule the automatic rendering. It doesn't seem like there is. Tassedethe (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

ndash
Why this edit? Writing
 * John Xmith (1802-1895)
 * John Xmith (1802-1895)

is incorrect according to the style manual. The correct form is
 * John Xmith (1802–1895)
 * John Xmith (1802–1895)

or
 * John Xmith (1802 – 1895)
 * John Xmith (1802 – 1895)

An ndash looks conspicuously different from a hyphen. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That is a very old edit, made only soon after I started editing on here. You are correct that it is completely wrong; I would definitely not make that mistake now. Tassedethe (talk) 19:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Hernando de Soto
You changed a link in the above article from Juan Ortiz to Juan Ortiz (explorer) which does not exist. This produced a redlink when the original link went to the correct article. It's probably better not to create redlinks where blue links are working well. Thanks! JodyBtalk 15:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The page Juan Ortiz is a disambiguation page so it can't be the right page, see WP:DPL. Changing it to redlink indicates to other editors that a proper page needs to be created, or perhaps the link should be removed completely. Tassedethe (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

So Big!
I saw that you've been working on the page for "So Big", the Edna Ferber novel, including "disambiguating". I once changed the name on the actual article to exclude the exclamation point that had been incorrectly used in the novel's title but didn't know how to do that for the name of the page, itself. Thought I might bounce that one to you if you're interested. There's no final exclamation point used in the title of the Edna Ferber novel. Hollywood saw fit to add that to an early film version but the novel is correctly just "So Big". (But a great novel regardless!) --Contributingfactor (talk) 14:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking at the picture it seems pretty clear - no exclamation point. I'll put that right, thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out with the Taylors
I've been slowly working on adding to List of people with surname Taylor (there are hundreds (literally) more to add). I noticed you fixed up the format of the disambig pages -- thanks. If you'd like to help more, it'd be great if you could add vial dates (birth & death) to any of the entries on the dab pages that don't have them, then merge them onto the main list. Thanks for any help! 75.214.164.37 (talk) (really, User:JesseW/not logged in) 18:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Charles Waterhouse
Wow! Replacing "-" with – could be a full time occupation!! Good luck! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * When someone programs a bot to do it I will be a lot happier. Tassedethe (talk) 11:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

David Willis
You edited the title of my entry from David Willis, BBC to David Willis, journalist. Why did you do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piesplatter (talk • contribs) 02:17, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The style manual dictates that qualifiers to a persons name (when there is more than one person of the same name) should be in parentheses, see WP:QUALIFIER. Also that it should be a generic qualifier with no affiliation i.e journalist not BBC journalist. 'BBC journalist' would only be used if, for instance, there was a NBC journalist also called David Willis. Tassedethe (talk) 09:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Jake Reed (musician)
You seem really quite insistant on making sure this musician has no place on Wikipedia. Why? He is relevant and notable, and I have edited the page to show this. Please look at this page and think about whether it is really necessary to delete the article. I would like to point out that there is a substantial amount of musicians on Wikipedia that have no notability outside of a single band, yet their pages have never been challenged. This page has now been edited to include reliable third party references and to also show this musician is notable for more than just one musical endeavour. It also includes a notable songwriting credit, backed up by an official and reliable source. Helloyou32 (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no personal opinion on this musician. In my opinion he didn't meet the requirements for notability. WP:MUSICBIO is quite clear: "Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases." Personally I don't think the side-project that you have added aids notability, releasing music online could apply to everyone with a myspace page. I will let other people make that judgement however. Tassedethe (talk) 12:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As I have said before, there is an incredible amount of musicians on Wikipedia who are notable only within one band, and their articles have never been challenged. I don't know why you have honed in on this particular one and let the others sit there happily. Is there anywhere else other than the atricles deletion page where I can appeal this? Helloyou32 (talk) 13:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is regarded as a poor argument for keeping an article. If you show me articles on non-notable single band musicians I will happily nominate them for deletion. As far as I know the deletion page is the only place to discuss the article. (If it is deleted you could ask for a review but that is usually for procedural mistakes, or if you find extra references.) Tassedethe (talk) 13:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No thank you, I have already seen that upon mentioning Leonard Graves Phillips you have slapped a notice on that article too. I daren't pass on the details of anyone else. I think it's rather petty to be honest, but nevermind. We'll see what happens. Helloyou32 (talk) 13:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I note you have added Merge requests to Jake Reed and Jake Reed (American football player). You might find a Move request would be more productive (technically there's nothing at Jake Reed (American football player) to merge). Move requests are at WP:RM. Tassedethe (talk) 13:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Disambiguation/Malplaced disambiguation pages
Since you're making a lot of requests at WikiProject Disambiguation/Malplaced disambiguation pages with a lot of preceeding page moves on your part, can I ask how you decide when there is no primary meaning? This would help with transparency for me, as it makes sure that this is really (mostly) non-controversial. Thank you. – sgeureka t•c 10:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Since you're also the one doing the page moves, may I suggest that you also handle the incoming links onto the dab pages afterwards? Ignore this if you are already doing this - I see you're really involved in the whole dab business. :-) – sgeureka t•c 10:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit clash) Usually I consider several things. The total number of items on the dab page, the number of incoming links to the 'primary topic' and how many appear to be wrong, and the apparent primacy of the topic. I have been looking at people with the surname White. Two pages I haven't decided to move are Jack White (disambiguation) (high number of links to primary topic) and Samuel White (disambiguation) (only one person of that name). I also make an effort to correct all links to the moved page. This acts as a deterrent to myself, I don't want to have to disambiguate lots of links. I have made lots of requests at WP:MDP and so far (touch wood) an admin has only disputed my reasoning once. I then went via WP:RM, no harm no foul. I hope that is all clear. Tassedethe (talk) 10:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, so you really do know what you're doing. :-) I had just never seen your name pop up anywhere before and wanted to make sure I am not helping in creating an accidental mess. Thanks for putting my (self-)doubts to rest. Have a nice day. – sgeureka t•c 10:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, glad everthing's alright Tassedethe (talk) 11:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Mike Sanders
Why did you move the page without any discussion? The wrestler is far more notable than some no-name former basketball player, and a hatlink is all that is needed since there are only 2 articles.  TJ   Spyke   00:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't feel that the wrestler was the primary topic, per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. As such a disambiguation page was the best choice. You can always apply at WP:RM if you feel that is wrong. Tassedethe (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

William Herschel (disambiguation)
Upon withdrawal of your nomination, I've closed the AfD. I hope that's okay. Although I now realize that the dab page has been restored back to its original state, sans the new additions. What are your thoughts on that? Leave  Sleaves  13:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes I saw that. I wasn't prepared to edit the page, keeping strictly to the guidelines, just to keep the reasons for deletion valid. Several people seemed to want to keep the page so I thought I'd just withdraw gracefully. I would query User:JHunterJ who actually did the editing. He's an experienced editor of DAB pages so I would trust his judgement. Tassedethe (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Right. If you want, I will revert my closure. Leave  Sleaves  14:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you do that it will allow people to express their opinion, and hopefully come to a consensus, so that would be good. Tassedethe (talk) 14:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Closure reverted. Leave  Sleaves  14:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Marcel Reanud dab fix
Thanks for the Marcel Renaud (canoer) dab fix. Greatly appreciated. Chris (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thanks :-) Tassedethe (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

David Stevenson
Re: this edit, what sort order have you put them in, and why? (They were in alphabetic order.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah. I moved the son so that he was next to the father. That mean I could use his son rather than son of David Stevenson (engineer), which was several places down the list, and, I thought, rather inelegant. I then just added a new entry at the bottom. Feel free to reorder if you like, but I always feel that alphabetical is the poorest choice. It so depends on the choice of the disambiguation word (which readers may not get correct), or on the use of a middle name/initial, which again is something a reader is less likely to know. I prefer chronological by birth date, or grouped by occupation. Tassedethe (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. I both agree AND disagree with you at the same time!! (Probably more agree than disagree.)
 * Grouped by occupation is good (where there's enough of the same occupation to make a group).
 * However, I don't think I agree that alpabetical is the poorest choice ...
 * I need to give this more thought.
 * Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:25, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * My use of inelegant words now :-). There are many ways of ordering that are a lot worse than alphabetical. Alphabetical can be fine if leeway is made for problematic entries. I'm thinking of pages where, for instance, there are several baseball players. It makes sense to keep them all together even if they should strictly be separated e.g John Smith (catcher) John Smith (pitcher) etc. Ah well, the never ending project that is disambiguation pages... Tassedethe (talk)

John O'Callaghan
Hello again. Can I ask you for some input about John O'Callaghan? Three barely notable people, one of them even without an article (but he is mentioned in List of Stargate Atlantis characters and related articles) - would you also turn it into a dab page? – sgeureka t•c 13:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, no problem. Tassedethe (talk) 13:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Minor move dispute
Hi, would you mind having a look at User talk:Aervanath‎ and share any thoughts you may have? Thanks, --Kotniski (talk) 18:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation style
Hi, I saw you changed up one of my edits on the disambiguation for 2.

I'm trying to figure out how I should be doing these, but I'm having trouble locating the one link per line rule in the manual for disambiguations. Can you point me in the right direction?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdb484 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, the relevant section is at WP:MOSDAB and is covered in the bullet point beginning "To avoid confusing the reader...". I hope this helps. Tassedethe (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Got it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdb484 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Conflicting date
helpmeThe article This Time/I Wish You Well (single) has conflicting dates. Isn't there a specific cleanup template or tag to cover this? I couldn't find it at WP:TMC
 * Is it contradict? --Closedmouth (talk) 12:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that's it. Thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 12:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Mike Hart (poet)
Concerning, this edit, wouldn't it be better to create at least a stub article? SamuelTheGhost (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It would be better, but I'm not a great one for creating new articles. Redlinks are allowed on disambiguation pages provided that the redlink is linked from another page (per MOS:DABRL); that one is linked from several. Saying that, as I have an mp3 of Mike Hart's "Almost Liverpool 8" I might have a go at the stub. Tassedethe (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be nice. I've also just confirmed that I can easily add an unwritten article to my watchlist, and I've done so. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I put together a short article with a couple of references. Tassedethe (talk) 13:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've added some relevant links, but also found a false one which perfectly illustrates the danger of leaving red links for later infilling. In Hart (person) there's an entry
 * Mike Hart (poet) (1948-2002), English poet
 * followed by

which used to be a red link but is now blue, but which is quite definitely the wrong person (impossible vital dates, and follow the internet link to see the biography). SamuelTheGhost (talk) 15:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I got that same link via google - it took a couple of readings to assure myself it was a different person. Tassedethe (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've changed him to Mike Hart (bookseller) so he's gone red again. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 17:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Db-disambig
Thanks for the Template:Db-disambig tip! I wouldn't have had the courage to create such a tl, but i think i'll be comfortable using it. --Jerzy•t 06:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You're wecome. Happy deleting! Tassedethe (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

disambiguation of NRHP sites
Hi, i notice you have several edits of the First Presbyterian Church disambiguation article, removing information about certain churches being NRHPs. I revised one, to note that the church is in fact NRHP-listed, although you are correct that does not need to be wikilinked since there is a bluelink now for the church article itself. I believe that it is helpful to keep the NRHP info. I then noticed you've made other changes along the same lines, though I have not yet reviewed your contributions. This note to you to suggest that you merely remove the wikilinking, and leave the NRHP mention in. Could you please stop, if you are in the process of making similar changes, and discuss? By the way, I participated in a long discussion at WikiProject Disambiguation regarding the disambiguation of NRHP listings, a dicussion now archived at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Archive 13. Sincerely, doncram (talk) 01:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Renaming churches and other articles
Hey, looking at your contributions for reason mentioned above, and a different matter than this, I notice that you have moved/renamed a bunch of articles. For example, renaming "First Presbyterian Church of Oyster Bay to First Presbyterian Church (Oyster Bay, New York). Your edit summary suggests to me that you are performing the renaming so that the dab page will look more consistent, so that all the churches will appear to have parallel names.  That is absolutely incorrect, in my view.  The Oyster Bay church appears to have the NRHP program name, in reality, of "First Presbyterian Church of Oyster Bay".  That is an appropriate name for the article.  Adding a parenthetical (town, state) expression to a name is done to add to its regular name when necesseary to distinguish it from others having exactly the same name.  So, please stop and/or discuss! doncram (talk) 02:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, sorry about that. That's the first time I've wandered into the NRHP area, perhaps I should avoid it. If you want to revert any changes I have no problem with that. Tassedethe (talk) 07:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I really welcome your interest and hope you may be willing to continue on to some other churches or other disambiguation pages. User:Clariosophic built up a bunch of church dab pages, but has not been active recently, so recently it has mostly just been me fixing up these large dab pages involving many NRHP links.  I was alarmed at first, but reviewing what you've done, I see that your attention has really improved / cleaned up the First Presbyterian dab page.  I've now gone through all your edits to the First Presbyterian Church page and re-implemented them, with some modifications.  You had found and added a number of other First Presbyterian churches, you caught numerous entries where there was a now-unnecessary 2nd bluelink and you fixed other types of problems.  Thanks also for pausing to let me take a look at what you did! doncram (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. I think the general principles relevant are:


 * each dab entry should usually have one and only one bluelink,
 * each dab entry should show the actual full name of the article, which should not be hidden by pipelink or redirect
 * presence of an entry on the dab should sometimes be explained (e.g. Fish Church, also known as First Presbyterian Church of ___'
 * the articles' names should not be changed to conform to the dab page, but rather the other way around
 * For NRHP entries where the article has not been created, a red-link to the official NRHP program name to the intended article can/should be shown (and official names may vary in format, sometimes requiring disambiguating (city, state) and sometimes not).
 * For the NRHP entries where the article is a red-link, a bluelink to the corresponding NRHP list-article which shows the same red-link should be included. I have often taken the expedient of merely linking to a state-wide NRHP list-article, but for states whose NRHP list-articles have been subdivided, the technically correct place to link to is a county- or city-specific narrrower list-article.
 * For NRHP entries where the article is now a bluelink, the link to the corresponding NRHP list-article should be removed. This can be done by delinking and just showing the phrase "listed on the NRHP in___".   This could also be done by removing the phrase completely, but I think it helps the dab lists to show the NRHP listing info for these.  It suggests to arriving new editors, that perhaps notability matters, and I think it tends to fend off directory-type additions of non-notable places.
 * All the NRHP ones are wikipedia-notable, that has been generally established, because NRHP listing reflects an official recognition of a place's importance for architectural or other reasons, and there are extensive NRHP nomination/registration documents available to provide documentation.
 * Other red-link entries not having an associated blue-link which provides context and an identical red-link, could arguably be deleted, because their notability has not been established and is not even supported in any observable way. However, I personally choose not to delete those, to avoid getting into fights and because many such red-links may actually be to notable places.
 * Your edits showed sensitivity to many of those principles and others. Really, I would like to see you develop/refine other church dabs and other types of dabs having NRHPs on them, too.  Let me know if you do or if I could help in any way, especially to fix up NRHP entries.  I've visited many of them to fix up the NRHP entries on them, but I've missed others. doncram (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I certainly will follow the guidelines on extra bluelinks etc but I won't be so quick with the page moves! Tassedethe (talk) 22:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiCleaner
Hi, would you please use your wikicleaner program to change all the links named List of Adolf Hitler books to the articles new name List of books by or about Adolf Hitler. Thank you Green Squares (talk) 15:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I never knew WikiCleaner could do that, so I have learned something new. The only problem is that it pipes the link. So List of Adolf Hitler books becomes List of Adolf Hitler books. I'm not sure if this is what would be wanted. Tassedethe (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Peter King
You edited this disambiguation page and removed the line that Peter T. King (born 1944), U.S. Republican Congressman from New York is famous for being a supporter of terrorism. That is by far the biggest thing that this congressman is known for, and his support has been well documented over the years. Please refer to the citations on his specific article if you were not aware of this. I would hope that in future you would WP:AGF and not just remove edits made by IP addresses without even checking if they were legitimate or not. 81.157.176.5 (talk) 14:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It was unnecessary to check whether they were legitimate or not. Disambiguation pages need only contain enough information to disambiguate each item. If there had been a second Peter King who was also a US congressman or a NY politician then perhaps your addition would have been needed, but there isn't so it wasn't. Tassedethe (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The thing he is most famous for his involvement in terrorism, during the Northern Ireland troubles he was considered the most Pro-IRA politican in America and has been involved in fundraising for them. But I guess you are right, and that he's the only US congressman with that name so that wasn't required. Perhaps you might want to go back to the article and remove other information that isn't required then? I'll help you out a bit here

Peter King, 1st Baron King (c. 1669–1734), Lord Chancellor of England Comment: How many other Peter King, 1st Baron Kings can there be? 'Lord Chancellor of England' can surely be removed.

Pete King (saxophonist) (born 1929), English jazz musician (tenor sax) and manager of Ronnie Scott's Jazz Club Peter King (saxophonist) (born 1940), English jazz musician (saxes and clarinet) Comment: You could remove the bit about managing Ronnie Scott's Jazz Club, because the differences in age should surely be enough for users to tell the difference between them?

Pete King (British musician) (1958–1987), British drummer Comment: We know his date of birth and left and that he was a musician, isn't that enough?

Peter King (afrobeat), Nigerian afro-beat tenor saxophonist, famous for his album Shango Comment: Only afro-beat tenor saxophonist with this name, information about his famous album is not required.

Peter T. King (born 1944), U.S. Republican Congressman from New York Comment: Only Republican congressman with this name so the part about New York can be removed. Actually he's the only congressman for any party with this name so why not remove the bit about being Republican?

Peter King (footballer) (born 1943), English footballer Comment: Only footballer with this name, so why not remove the bit about him being English?

Peter J. King (born 1956), English philosopher, lecturer at Pembroke College, Oxford Comment: only philospher here, so you could remove the part about his nationality and where he lectures.

Peter King (sportswriter) (born 1957), writer for Sports Illustrated Comment: only sportswriter with this name, so you could remove the bit about what magazine he works with.

81.157.176.5 (talk) 16:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want to make those edits go right ahead, I wouldn't disagree with them. Tassedethe (talk) 16:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well I thought you might want to do it, otherwise it would look like your earlier edit that removed information about a man who is most notable for being a terrorist being a terrorist would somehow make it appear that you were editing with a non-neutral POV? 81.157.176.5 (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just passing through, but I agree with the edit as made. Since we all wp:assume good faith, there is no need to fix EVERYTHING just because we fix SOMETHING.  This is a very important thing to remember.sinneed (talk) 23:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Killed red link at IGDA
Always good to say why. I restored the red link. I light-heartedly hope wp:red links encourage folk to create articles...sinneed (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry yes, I was being a bit stringent per MOS:DABRL (at David Walker), a link that just occurs on a single page. I restored it there. Thanks for your comment above, I'd decided to follow WP:DFTT. Tassedethe (talk) 23:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Jimmie Rodgers
I knew I should have checked that link. The article about WMPS misspelled it and I didn't even bother to check the spelling, which would have led me to that page.

However, I'm not clear as to which Jimmie Rodgers it was. If he died in 1933, I suppose he could have performed on WMPS. But the other one may have been the right one. He sort of sounds coun try to me. And yet his career seems to have been mostly after those years the article was referring to. Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I only changed the link as it seemed more likely to be him (the Carter family and Bob Wills being of his era, rather than the blues or pop singer). However I have no proof, so if there is a doubt in the source then perhaps removing the name or restoring the original link and adding dn would be a better solution. Tassedethe (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions for disambiguation
Greetings. You've previously helped out at Suggestions for name disambiguation, so I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know we have a brand new batch of 3,835 names to be checked! These include sports figures, federal judges, serial killers, librarians, and other assorted sundry folks. This batch also should be a little easier to update, with corrected templates and a handy search function. Enjoy! – Quadell (talk) 03:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Swing Districts
Hey. Can you please help me finish my article. Thanks. --Mapple001 (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

invitation
You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at WikiProject Council/Proposals ! :) doncram (talk) 06:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Sonal Shah
Greetings Tassedethe. I'm still a bit nervous about creating dab pages (you may recall that I've asked you in the past for help in creating dab pages for Allen Snyder and Ruben Castillo). I was wondering if you could help me create one for Sonal Shah? Right now in Wikipedia, there is a Sonal Shah (actor), whose page I created, and a Sonal Shah (with no parentheses next to her article title) who is an economist. I was thinking that Wikipedia should have a Sonal Shah dab page, which directs users to pages for Sonal Shah (economist) and Sonal Shah (actress). Can you help by creating the dab page? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks so much! User talk:Jarvishunt.

Greetings Tassedethe. I went ahead and created the disambiguation page myself; take a look and see if I did it right (I followed your instructions from the Allen Snyder and Ruben Castillo situations). User talk:Jarvishunt.
 * Nearly perfect. I especially like that you corrected the incoming links. I made a minor style change, WP:MOSDAB requires that there is only a single blue link for each entry. Tassedethe (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Anthony Steel
I see you've decided the actor is not the primary usage, and you've made various edits to reflect this. Are you going to sort out the links which used to point to his page and now point to the dab page? There are rather a lot of them. An alternative would be to unpick things and go back to having him as the primary usage. PamD (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, you've got me mid-fix. Tassedethe (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Would you be interested in administering?
Hi, Tassedethe. Given your activities on the malplaced dabs work, I was wondering if you'd be willing to go through the RFA process to become an admin and get your own mop. It would speed some of the results of your efforts with the malplaced dabs. I'll start the nomination if you're willing. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Firstly, many thanks for considering me for this. I have thought about it overnight and would be pleased to accept. I have some concerns that I have weaknesses in certain areas (e.g FA creation, vandalism fighting, help desk etc) but I hope my overall contribution would be enough. Only one way to find out though! Tassedethe (talk) 08:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent!

 JHunterJ would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact JHunterJ to accept or decline the nomination. A page for your nomination at Requests for adminship/Tassedethe . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
 * I'm not sure why is says to contact me; in any event, I'm watching both this talk page and the RFA page, so I'll see your acceptance there. Good luck! -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just put up my acceptance. Thanks again for your nomination.Tassedethe (talk) 12:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: your answer to question 6c on your RfA
There's a more specific tag for unsourced BLP's: BLP unsourced. Also, BLP sources. Not that it matters much though, I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you weren't aware of it. :) -- OlEnglish (Talk) 22:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks v. much. I'm not sure of the etiquette for changing answers in an RfA so I won't. I wasn't aware of it, but now I am and I will make good use of it the future, successful RfA or not. Tassedethe (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No prob, btw, if you're looking for something to disambiguate, Keno needs a page. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 01:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, just so you know, I'd be willing to do a little quid pro quo. IF you support me in my request for adminship, I will support yours. Wetman88 (talk) 02:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Legit trading going on as always. :P — neuro  (talk) (review) 03:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. Bit of a car crash RfA with that one. Tassedethe (talk) 16:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

"Sr." with commas?
Why did you change "James E. Cofer Sr." to "James E. Cofer, Sr."? I know the rules but obviously wrote the article without the comma (which in some cases would become commas).

Eliminating the comma is the more-streamlined practice, more compatible with alphabetizing by computers, less cluttered, unprone to concerns of whether another comma should segue, etc.

I have no fetish about such a trivium and am only trying to learn from someone who felt motivated to make the change.

Rammer (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a specific style guide for people with junior or senior in their name at WP:NCP. I took no part in setting this rule, I just corrected a lot of these types of style "errors" in 1 or 2 sessions. Sometimes this has the result of fixing redlinks. The addition of punctuation does of course affect computer sorting etc. which is why some punctuation is removed in sort keys, but there has to be a balance with human readability. It seems that this balance currently falls on the side of including the comma. Tassedethe (talk) 21:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe so, but the issue is worth a discussion not clouded by other issues. The emphasis in WP:NCP is really on use of "Jr." and "Sr." as disambiguators, not on use or non-use of commas.  What should be most important is to keep the practice consistent within the same article.  And the Cofer article wasn't, once you inserted the comma into the article title.  :)  In the first line he was still identified without it.  Anyway, I decided to obviate the business by having redirects from both the comma and the non-comma versions to one which eliminates the "Sr." altogether.  Now all we need is an administrator to lift the legacy history over to the article on James E. Cofer.  Rammer (talk) 04:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Surprised you haven't got one of these yet.

 * Many thanks. And thank you for your support in my RfA. Tassedethe (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now an administrator
I'm happy to inform you that, due to your successful request for adminship, you have now been promoted to an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or stop by the administrators' noticeboard. Congrats! Andre (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, congratulations. You're also welcome to ask me if you have any questions. Some you might come up with in your mopping up of misplaced dabs involve splitting and merging edit histories (from cut-n-paste moves when someone decided to turn an article into a dab page). The first one can be tricky. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for the nomination and your support. I am intending to spend some time at New Admin School before I launch myself on the project. Tassedethe (talk) 06:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. And considering that I never noticed your edits before, I keep stumbling accross them now that I know your name. Good luck with the buttons, if you have any questions feel free to ask. Cheers, Amalthea  01:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for RfA support
I'd like to thank everyone who supported me in my recent RfA. I hope that I don't disappoint. I'd also like to thank those who didn't support me but made me consider my areas of weakness. Apologies if anyone is disappointed to not receive Thankspam but it doesn't mean I don't care! Tassedethe (talk) 06:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

John Penrose
I can't see anywhere where the recent move of John Penrose was clearly discussed. PatGallacher (talk) 10:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it wasn't discussed, I was being WP:BOLD. Last month there were 382 hits for John Penrose, 158 for John Penrose (actor), 46 for John Penrose (archer) and 79 for for the disambiguation page John Penrose (disambiguation). To me that indicates that that there is no clear primary topic per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, "much more used than any other topic covered in Wikipedia to which the same word(s) may also refer (significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings)". Tassedethe (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It's often justified to be bold, but this could be a case of being a bit too bold, making potentially controversial changes without discussion. See talk for John Penrose. PatGallacher (talk) 10:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Blackout
Notwithstanding WP:MOSDAB we are running into trouble reinstating "quotes" to show a title as this has not been done consistently throughout the DAB, which uses italics elsewhere; we need one or the other. Personally I think quotes are a legacy restriction of typewriters, outdated and clumsy and should be reserved for actual quotes - titles should be shown as italics. I don't think MOSDAB is insistent on this form but consistency is important. I took out the redlinks anyway, that is MOSDAB Ex nihil (talk) 08:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not necessary to have one or the other. WP:ITALICS outlines what titles should be italicised (e.g films and books) and what should have quotes (e.g songs). The redlinks are ok per MOS:DABRL. By taking out the links but not removing the piping etc. leaves the page even less consistent. Tassedethe (talk) 08:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You are right about WP:ITALICS but the convention is entirely illogical; it is hard to see the categorical distinction between a book title and a "song title" that suggest they should be treated differently. I think WP:ITALICS needs a rethink.  Anyway, as Blackout stands now the band that played the song is Normal, the album that contains the song is Italics and the song itself is in "Quotes".  Now that is one big ugly mess whatever the MOS.  I'll leave this one alone, will not pursue, OTY.  Ex nihil (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right about that, some entries require a lots of extra work just to follow 'the rules'. I would be happier to throw a lot of it out. Tassedethe (talk) 09:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Al[l][e|a]n[n*] Jenkins
So, why put your foot in it and change the link? The history of all the articles was clear, the move request was clear, two editors were changing links (myself and another) to fix it up, and you put your feet in wet cement per WP:WETCEMENT. I am fed up with WP:WETCEMENT. It took all of twenty minutes to fix it up, it would have taken ten if you and a bot hadn't got in the way.

Why do you do it? I am sure you are acting in good faith but a quick glance at the history would easily have shown that it was being fixed up, you could have left it alone for a few hours, even an hour. As it is, the two editors actually fixing up these links for, let's face it, rather an obscure set of articles, had to run round them checking your links because of your change per WP:WETCEMENT.

But sincerely (and I really do mean sincerely) thank you for caring, that's good. I'm annoyed at your change but it's good that people care about the WP project, so truly thank you. And it's all fixed now so no worries, just needed a grumble! SimonTrew (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if my changes caused you problems, in hindsight I could have waited a few hours. Tassedethe (talk) 04:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Watchlists
Hello, Tasse. I know it's a strange question, but how many pages do you have on your watchlist? I read on here that after 8800 it starts to slow down so much it barely works, but I now have 3 usernames (Boleyn, Boleyn 2 and 3) as I've moved over once I've reached this number. However, with the type of pages we're both likely to watch, there isn't much activity. I see your name pop up on my watchlist so often I thought you must have managed to get it much higher, or do you not add them all to your watchlist? Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 18:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and I see you've become an admin, congratulations! It's well deserved. Boleyn3 (talk) 18:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I have 12000+ on my watchlist. I have not noticed a slowdown, my watchlist loads as fast as any other page. I had assumed that you must have far more pages to deal with - I'm always impressed by your thoroughness. You might try going past 8800 with one of your usernames, you might be fine. And thanks for the congrats! Tassedethe (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

(disambiguation) and Brian Nelson
In cases where there is a famous individual, such as George Washington, it links directly to that person, and a separate disambiguation page is created such as George Washington (disambiguation) for other people of that name. When there is no individual that is more famous than another, than the page for the name itself becomes the DAB page. I'm curious why you restored the Brian Nelson (disambiguation) page, this is not normally how it's done for a name such as this. Green Cardamom (talk) 13:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I restored it as you had in effect cut/paste the page Brian Nelson (disambiguation) to Brian Nelson. Proper procedure is to use WP:RM to move such pages. I have had to restore it again, cut/paste moves are to be avoided, please see WP:CUTPASTE. Tassedethe (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, if your going to contest it than you had better come up with a reason why, because the precedent on Wikipedia is clear. See David Thompson for example. "first last (disambiguation)" is a special situation with proper names, only used in special cases. Why are you making Brian Nelson a special case situation? Green Cardamom (talk) 14:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not making it a special case. I am disagreeing with your method of moving it. I will be happy to move the proper disambiguation page (with its edit history) if there is consensus that the other page will be at Brian Nelson (1948-2003)‎. Tassedethe (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Those are two separate issues. Brian Nelson (1948-2003)‎ can be called whatever, it doesn't effect how the disambiguation is handled. Are you an admin? Green Cardamom (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am an admin. But I am not going to move the page until I can see some consensus; consensus may form around moving Brian Nelson (1948-2003)‎ back to Brian Nelson‎. You're correct about the nature of [firstname lastname (disambiguation)] pages, this topic is discussed at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. But if you disagreed about Brian Nelson being the primary topic the proper thing to do would be to use WP:RM not cut/paste. Tassedethe (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect: Arise
Greetings... Although I don't oppose at all the Arise redirect you've done, you should have given a heads-up first... Just a matter simple of courtesy, not of Wikipedia protocols. Musicaindustrial (talk) 17:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki links from English surname pages
Hi Tassedethe, I wonder if you could help me. I'm contacting you because you helped sort out a problem I had with back in early April under the heading Ulrik.

I'm getting problems with bots removing interwiki links from pages that I create. First User:Xqt removed the link to German wikipedia from Husch - there's some discussion about this on User_talk:Xqt. I've reverted the edit, and if you look at the English page and the German page I've linked to, I think you will agree that the link is sensible. Then yesterday User:TXiKiBoT removed interwiki links from three pages I had just created: Sauli, Lameth and Hammes. I've reverted these too, but I think it's only a matter of time before reverting bots becomes a full-time job...

I've been trying to understand what is going on, and suspect that it may be because English pages are not classified as disambiguation pages, but the corresponding pages on German and French wikipedias are. If the bot applies a rule that disambiguation pages should only be interwikied to other disambiguation pages, then this problem is going to persist. As Xqt wrote to me, "de:Hüsch is a disambiguation page but the is not listed at MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage. This forces iw-bots removing links to different page types."

I thought of various solutions - (a) I could stop using and use  instead (clearly wrong) or (b) I could put both  and  (not right either), or (c) I could mark all the pages  (don't want to do this, as bots should be performing useful maintenance tasks, and could be valuable). None of these is a proper solution.

What it really needs is a proper resolution of the conflicting rules here. What do you suggest?

Regards, Hebrides (talk) 07:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I personally don't have a solution but it does seem as though there has been a long discussion about this very problem at MediaWiki talk:Disambiguationspage. Perhaps the solution suggested there will be useful, good luck. Tassedethe (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's exactly it. When bots remove links I can now direct them to that page and ask them to implement a recognition of the solution given at the bottom. -- Hebrides (talk) 08:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Down in the Boondocks
I have nominated Down in the Boondocks, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Down in the Boondocks. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Peter Deyell
This is regarding the recently deleted article about Peter Deyell. I am the author, and would like to appeal the decision to delete it. I was not aware, until very late, that the article had been nominated for deletion. I was in the process of writing a rebuttal, but the article was removed before I could post my comments.

Before I offer my comments, I would first like to apologize if I am not following the proper procedure. However, Wikipedia's instructions for appealing a deletion are so complicated as to be virtually impossible to understand. Instead of offering clear links for the posting of comments, each link seems to lead to more instruction, which lead to more instructions, which lead nowhere.

Now for my rebuttal of the decision to delete the article about Peter Deyell...

As I recall, the original deletion-nominator complained that the article consisted of "Self-posted puffery." The article was not self-posted. As I said earlier, I wrote it. Yes, I am an associate of Peter Deyell, but he did not write his own article.

The writer complains that it's "surprising he (Deyell) seems to have no reputation beyond this Wikipedia entry." Since when is being a household name a prerequisite to being on Wikipedia? No, you will not see Mr. Deyell on the cover of The National Enquirer or People Magazine, but he is nevertheless well-known and active within the motion picture industry. You don't have to take my word for it. Ask members of the Directors Guild of America, including individuals such as Steven Spielberg, Arthur Hiller (LOVE STORY), Gene Reynolds (MASH creator) and many more. Mr. Deyell serves on the DGA's Special Projects Committee, which is comprised of a handful of directors and was chaired, until his death, by acclaimed director Robert Wise. Mr. Deyell was also a charter founder of the DGA's Artists Rights Foundation, which is now part of Martin Scorsese's The Film Foundation. Additionally, he is a member of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, as a director, not an actor, and served the Academy on the Directors & Choreographers Peer Group Executive Committee.

Mr. Deyell has a diverse background in many aspects of the industry, which is part of what makes him a rarity in Hollywood. Unlike most industry professionals, he is not limited to one or two specialities. As for the writer's assertion that some of Mr. Deyell's credits don't "check out," I suppose it depends on where one is checking. Although IMDB is a good source of information regarding film and television credits, it is by no means the be-all and end-all. IMDB does not list commercial or music video credits, and film and TV series credits are often missing. Elaine May's film "Not Enough Rope" is not on IMDB because it was not released to the general public, for complicated reasons that had nothing to do with Peter Deyell. However, the fact remains that it was his first feature-length film as a director. That is mentioned only as a matter of record, as is all of the other information in the article.

The writer claims that an Amazon search provides "no documentation of (Deyell's) career." I was not aware that Amazon's purpose is to "document" people's careers. Finally, the writer opines that Deyell "looks like a child actor who ended up in the Coast Guard..." Mr. Deyell's biography does not say that he was in the Coast Guard. It says that he was in the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve. I don't mean to nit-pick, but that is, in my opinion, what the writer of the original complaint about Mr. Deyell's biography is doing. Many articles on Wikipedia contain details for which no specific documentation is provided in the article, itself, even though such references are available. Such is the case with Mr. Deyell's biography, although the article does contain links to several external sources of information, as well as the titles of two motion picture industry books in which he is discussed.

Mr. Deyell is a respected professional in the industry. Certain individual, relatively minor achievements are included in his biography as a matter of record, not because they are, by themselves, special. Taken as a whole, however, Mr. Deyell has had a remarkable and diverse career, as should be evident to anyone who reads his bio in its entirety. He was, for example, the youngest vice president of production in motion picture history at Cinevest International, one of several production companies at General Service Studios, and was the artistic director of Center Stage Theatre in Los Angeles.

I believe that Peter Deyell is Wiki-worthy, and I urge you not to delete his biography. There are other articles on Wikipedia about individuals who have accomplished far less.

Frdndrsn (talk) 00:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The decision to delete the article is not in my hands. As the article stood there was no verification of the claims made in it. The links to external sources didn't discuss this person in detail, and on Wikipedia if reliable sources don't exist then it is impossible to have an article. You may wish to look at WP:BIO which outlines the notability requirements for a biographical article, and WP:RS which outlines reliable sources. Tassedethe (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

One More Night
Thanks for fixing all of the pages that were leading to the newly created disambig page! Carpet Crawler message me  23:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you're welcome. Tassedethe (talk) 06:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Page move
May I ask why you moved the Hold Me (album) article to Hold Me (Laura Branigan album)? There is only one other article on an album named Hold Me and it is for a stub about a title with little to no notability outside of the Japanese-speaking world. In fact, that stub has not been edited since it was created two years ago. Abrazame (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I will watch your page here for your response. Thanks.  Abrazame (talk) 08:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The music project has information on album name disambiguation at WP:MUSTARD. Basically if 2 or more albums have articles on Wikipedia they need to have the artist name included to disambiguate them. The relative notability/size of the articles doesn't really come into it. Of course if (in this case) the second article is deleted as non-notable then the other album can revert to the (album) disambiguator. Tassedethe (talk) 08:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI re "Leave a redirect behind"
It's a generally agreed-upon best practice to always leave a redirect behind when doing editorially-motivated page moves (i.e. as you did with The Rising Tide), such that the first entry in the history of the new (disambiguation page in this case) shows where the old tenant of the page location went. Unchecking the box is generally reserved for cases of vandalism reversion, userfication in some cases, and the like. See WP:R for more on this. Regards, –xenotalk 13:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I never knew that. I'll stop doing it. It was saving me the time of not having to delete the talk page redirects. Tassedethe (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yea, it's certainly useful in many cases. A trail is left in the page logs but most people don't know to look there. –xenotalk 15:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Soleil

 * Please see Cut and paste move repair holding pen about the Soleil histmerge request. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Robert Kent, the actor
Hello, Tassedethe. How are you doing today? I just had a question. Just wanted to know if you had the answer. Do you know the cause of death for the the actor known as Robert Kent, who was born in 1908 and died in 1955? Because he died at only 47 years old.Icemerang (talk) 00:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I don't. Good luck with your search. Tassedethe (talk) 06:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

not only me, but also Bkonrad and PamD
You should also warn those two.--141.89.77.122 (talk) 22:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I have changed acetyl, so I think now I can change ACE
Right?--141.89.77.122 (talk) 22:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No. Unless you can provide a reference for your addition to Acetyl it will be reverted. Such edits would be regarded as mendacious. Tassedethe (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure?--141.89.77.122 (talk) 22:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I can edit after 24 hours
Right?--141.89.77.122 (talk) 22:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals
This link is without ACE: Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. I will delete it.--141.89.77.122 (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Jon Cooper
I removed the prod as he seems to be professional with the Minnesota Vikings, and WP:ATHLETE says, "People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport". If you think he still fails notability, please take it to AfD. Fences and windows (talk) 01:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Fallen
Could you explain the recent move of Fallen (album) to Fallen (Evanescence album)? The given reasoning ( "multiple albums titled Fallen") isn't satisfactory on its own. The wiki question is whether there is a primary meaning - thus we have Revolver (album) and Revolver (The Haunted album). Gimmetrow 03:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The relevant section is at WP:ALBUM. "For multiple albums with the same title, use the artist name to distinguish the different albums". This is to avoid confusion when there are multiple albums with the same name. The WP:PRIMARYTOPIC rules apply to whether an article should have no disambiguator at all. If the article needs a disambuator then of course it should be unambiguous. At the moment Revolver (album) is incorrectly named, it too should be disambiguated to Revolver (The Beatles album). Tassedethe (talk) 06:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You would have been better off arguing that there is no primary meaning for Fallen (album). Gimmetrow 15:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

22 June 1897
Renaming the article 22 June 1897 (movie) to 22 June 1897 is introducing an ambiguity. The article is specifically about the movie and not about one or any events on that date, or even the Rand & Co assassination or the event with reference to the Indian freedom movement. I wish we revert to the original title which makes the scope of the article clear. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 06:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not Wikipedia style to add a disambiguator to an article unless there is another article with which it might be confused. (See WP:DAB or WP:NCF). As far as I can see there is no article about the events depicted in the film so it isn't necessary to add (movie). If I am wrong and there is an article about the events then the film article should be moved to 22 June 1897 (film) (film is the correct Wikipedia style disambiguator for films), and 22 June 1897 could be redirected. Tassedethe (talk) 08:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There isn't another article with the title 22 June 1897, if you consider film more appropriate, please go ahead. However perhaps you are right that a disambiguator is required only if there is more than one article of the same name. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Jim Hughes (politician)
I stubified it and removed your Prod. Disclosure: I am a Democrat. Bearian (talk) 00:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Ian Tomlinson
Re : What links were you referring to in your edit summary? The number of incoming mainspace wikilinks doesn't differ significantly (Death of Ian Tomlinson vs. Ian Tomlinson (athlete)). More importantly, the number of pageviews reveals the actual difference between the two articles: In June, Death of Ian Tomlinson had 4057 views vs. 75 views for Ian Tomlinson (athlete). I'm withholding judgement (and the according revert) because I'm not sure what links you were referring to. 78.34.103.149 (talk) 12:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I meant that most of the links to Ian Tomlinson were meant to be going to Ian Tomlinson (athlete) but people were being incorrectly redirected to Death of Ian Tomlinson (They were never corrected after the initial page move). I fixed all the links so now they all go to the correct articles. As so many links were wrong it makes the stats for the two pages unreliable. In the immediate aftermath of his death it seemed sensible to redirect to one article. If you want to revert to a redirect no problem, but if page stats drop back down (as I expect they will after the initial interest has waned) then I would reserve the option of restoring the dab page again. Tassedethe (talk) 13:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * True, it might have rendered the stats for the articles unreliable, and at first I thought you might have a point there. But the number of pageviews for Ian Tomlinson (the athlete's article) from before April tells another story. Ian Tomlinson had 78 pageviews in March. The maximum number of pageviews achieved by the article on the athlete was 80 in the month it was created, and it's a safe bet that the original author contributed to that number. As to waning interest, I daresay that --barring unexpectable future developments-- the athlete is never going to draw anywhere near the number of pageviews. Also, while e.g. the case of Jean Charles de Menezes was much more prominently featured in the media than the death of Ian Tomlinson, its 9712 pageviews from the month before the the fifth anniversary of Menezes' death make it somewhat probably that even with a gradually sinking number of pageviews, Death of Ian Tomlinson is going to remain of far far greater popular interest than the article on the athlete. 78.34.103.149 (talk) 13:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As I say converting it back to a redirect while page views are still much higher is reasonable, but as to future page view levels - I think experience shows that all such events eventually fade from public interest. Tassedethe (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe. Should that be the case, we're lucky this is a wiki and the dab can be restored at a moment's notice. 87.79.143.158 (talk) 19:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Bob Anderson
Hi, I noticed your move of the Bob Anderson article, which is great, but any chance you could move it to Bob Anderson (racing driver)? For consistency for one thing, plus "racer" is a really woolly term, which doesn't describe what kind of racing he actually did. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I did think about my choice of disambiguator because he was also a prolific motorcycle racer, so I thought that "racing driver" or "race car driver" etc would be overemphasing cars vs bikes. The wooliness was intentional. I can easily move it if you feel that it is more appropriate. Tassedethe (talk) 23:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought that too, and I wondered if the wooliness was intentional! It's one of those in-between ones, but I'd say he was certainly better-known as a Formula One driver. If anyone objects, I guess we could always move it back. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * After I started looking at all the links I need to disambiguate I realised that cars outnumbered bikes by at least 5 to 1, so I made the switch. Tassedethe (talk) 00:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) Hopefully everyone's happy with it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Anthony Watts - The edit war you started
Are you even aware of the edit war you started over a month ago? You gave one side of a the Global Warming camp the ability to slander a person while slipping it through the BLP rules. Almost half the talk page is dedicated to the disruption you caused. Q Science (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how you expect me to respond to your comment. I moved the page as there are multiple people named Anthony Watts and none can be regarded as the primary topic. As to the slander you'll have to be more explicit. Tassedethe (talk) 23:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * To be clear, multiple means 2 (two). One had a page without disambiguation for over 2 years, the other was always disambiguated. There was no reason at all for the change you made. (BTW, you never added either of those to the Watts surname page.)


 * As for the slander (or negative connotation), in the Global Warming area, blog and blogger are used as ad hominum attacks to discredit any web site (or person) that doesn't agree with the ruling group. Things were fine before YOU made a totally unnecessary change. Then the war started. I can't help but think that of the obviously thousands of other unnecessary changes that you have made, that there haven't been other totally unnecessary edit wars.


 * For normal editors on a controversial page, something like a name change would be discussed for a week or two before it was approved. But, one day, out of the blue, you just made a major change. By doing this to a page you are not even involved with, well I think it was very wrong. The fact that you started an edit war and then just disappeared is also a problem. Q Science (talk) 00:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As I have explained (twice) neither Anthony Watts could be regarded as the primary topic, so a move was necessary. My move didn't involve renaming the article "blogger" so why you are blaming me I can't reason. Perhaps you should complain to the editor who made that move. As to my editing record I will let it speak for itself - if yours consists of attacking editors at their talk pages then those are contributions Wikipedia could do without. Tassedethe (talk) 07:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2   Talk Autographs Contribs 01:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Mistaken identity. actual anonymous vandalism edit that preceded Tassedethe's. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clearing that up. Tassedethe (talk) 08:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry. -- How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2   Talk Autographs Contribs 00:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Gottfried Kottmann
Sorry about that, but I saw that the sports-reference.com file on Kottmann had him doing both bobsleigh and rowing. I was just trying to be helpful on that. Chris (talk) 21:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I will do that. Thanks. Chris (talk) 23:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

D'oh!
Well spotted! In my defence, I was suffering from a caffeine-deficiency...!

Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 23:45, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Mangled After Dinner
You vandalised (deleting) a well proven and old Wiki article regarding the UK goth rock band Mangled After Dinner, so, what the heck you done it??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.8.6.13 (talk) 03:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I proposed it for deletion as there were no references. Please see WP:RS and WP:N. Tassedethe (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Marchywka Effect categories
Is there some way to create those categories that I had listed as red links? In particular, things like "semiconductor processing" and "science you can do in garage or basement" seem like they may be able to fit in somewhere. Certainly the entries were placeholders but thinking about categories for an online reference work they seem reasonable. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 11:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. For instance to create you just need to add  to the redlinked category. Category:Semiconductors already contains several sub-categories perhaps one of those might be more appropriate e.g. Category:Semiconductor device fabrication. "science you can do in garage or basement" is a bit informal for the name of a category but if you create a category like that you should add  to create it. WP:CAT has more info.  Tassedethe (talk) 11:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Recipients of the Distinguished Service Cross
I've just supported your cfd nomination of the above. I've also made a suggestion for similar reasons that Category:Recipients of US Distinguished Service Cross be renamed Category:Recipients of Distinguished Service Cross (United States). Would you like to adopt this into your nomination, or would you prefer that this be made separately?

 X damr  talk 13:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Great minds think alike! I have just submitted that as well. Tassedethe (talk) 13:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Anglo-American Card Deck
Dear friend, thanks for updating the articles about card games like Lanterloo and Napoleon. I just would like to know if there's any other category of card decks on Wikipedia besides the Anglo-American one because despite my attempts to categorize the card games of French or even Spanish origin with their respective decks, this information is converted by some BOT unit to Anglo-American ! Is there something we could do about it ? Krenakarore (talk) 15:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a category Category:Spanish card games but not Category:French card games. You could easily create that by starting the page with the text . If a bot is making automatic edits perhaps you are using a specific template on the article that the bot uses to identify appropriate categories? If it keeps on happening I'd enquire at the Bot owner's talk page. Good luck. Tassedethe (talk) 15:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Wonderful, you've been really of great help to me pal. Thanks a million for your advice. All the very best Krenakarore (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Nigel Ward (disambiguation)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Nigel Ward (disambiguation), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cnilep (talk) 17:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Southern Careers Institute
Hello Tassedethe, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Southern Careers Institute has been removed. It was removed by ThaddeusB with the following edit summary ' (contest prod - secondary schools (including private ones) are generally considered to always be notable - see also ) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with ThaddeusB before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Generation of the 30s
I'm not sure why you removed the category "Generation of the 30s" from 3 Greek authors. It is the standard term in Greek literary studies for denoting one particularly influential literary movement. As such it is a useful category to have. --Pavlos Andronikos (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I removed it as it was a redlinked category, and there were no other categories that suggested it was part of a series. There is also no article on the subject. If it is a significant term it should be created as part of Category:Literary movements or similar. Tassedethe (talk) 12:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Danish people
Since I kind of shot down your attempt to rename one of these categories, you may be interested in my nomination to follow up and set things right: Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_14. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Unfree labor?
Hi,

I noticed you changed the catagory spelling. As I understand it, Wikipedia uses standard English rather than American English for materials not dealing with the United States. The changing of the spelling from English to American convention, especially for something dealing with a European topic was really and unneeded. Maybe you may consider changing it back. Bandurist (talk) 14:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no such category as Category:Unfree labour during World War II which is why I corrected it to Category:Unfree labor during World War II. If you think the category should be renamed you are welcome to take it to WP:CFD. Generally if topics are region specific then they get region specific spelling (i.e. British topics get British spelling, American topics get American spelling). For other topics spelling is most often decided by whoever creates the category. Tassedethe (talk) 14:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi

What a pleasure it is to communicate with you. As opposed to a number of the editors in the EAst European forums. Have a good day. --Bandurist (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ben King
Could you explain how people such as Andrew Bancroft and David Prager passed notability? How are they considered more notable? Furthermore, who determines who's "popular" or "famous" on the Internet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.170.68 (talk) 21:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTABILITY outlines what articles need to show notability. The existence of other articles that may or may not be notable is not a reason to keep an article if it has no reliable sources to show notability. Tassedethe (talk) 21:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Rozenkwit
Hello

My name is Ester Hadassa Sandler, nee Ester Hadassa Rozenkwit. I am writting to you in order to find some information about the page Rozenkwit. For example, who wrote it, why, and which are the sources. Are there reliable? I felt very amazed when a friend sent me this page because I had never been able to find anything about my family. My father was born in 1916 in Olyka, the same year his father died. His mother ruled a agriculture's tools business. Although he always stressed the meaning of our surname, he never told me the whole story. He died in 1990, many years before this kind of information via Internet was available. He arrived in Brazil in 1935, where two sisters of him had already settled. His eldest brother was murdered in Olika, by the nazis. In 1964 he found a cousin living in Israel and that it is everything I could find about the story of my family and lineage. No relatives, never met other people with this surname, either in South America or in the United States. I think you can understand how thrilled I was when I read the Wikipedia. Although many informations match with the few things my father told me, for instance, the count Radziwill and his castle, where my father studied in the Gymnasium, something that was unique amongst his jewish fellows, the whole story as it was published seems to me to be rather fantastic. Anyway, I would be grateful if you can help me to answer some of these questions. EsterHadassa (talk) 23:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I only made a small change to the article Rozenkwit and do not know anything about the name. From looking at it unfortunately most of the references it provides are not very good. They don't confirm any of the statements about the derivation of the name or the history of the family in Germany. As Hebrides says the main author of the article is someone named Arriusjensen, perhaps they would have more information. Looking myself on the web I cannot find much to confirm the statements. I did find the similar name Rosenkwit mentioned in the book "A dictionary of Jewish names and their history" by Benzion C. Kaganoff. This is available on Amazon. Sorry I can't be of more help. Tassedethe (talk) 10:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Items to be merged
Please note that in most cases the merge template is on the page that has to be merged into the other one, but not always. This is because in most cases both categories were tagged, and I removed the tag from the other category. But there were a few cases where only one category was tagged.

In a few cases, like Category:House of Mark, the merge involves a rename.

Category:Islam articles without infoboxes needs to be renamed because Template:WikiProject Islam previously sorted to this one, and now changed to the other one.

In the case of Category:Organized crime groups the nomination should also involve most of the subcategories. Debresser (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. Before I carry on blundering on, I thought I'd check one thing. This Category:Concatenative programming languages was tagged to merge with Category:Stack-oriented programming languages. No reason was provided but was opposed at the talk page here. I decided that a 3-year-old request with no rationale wasn't worth continuing with (I noted that there are separate articles for Concatenative programming language and Stack-oriented programming language) so I left a note explaining that I'd removed the merge tag at the nominators talk page here. If you think I was mistaken doing that please let me know. Tassedethe (talk) 20:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have been removing some merge tags myself, when I noticed redlinked targets or wp:snow nominations. I left only those that seemed reasonable to me. If it is reasonable, then I don't see any intrinsic problem with the fact that the original tagging was done three years ago. Debresser (talk) 22:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As to this specific case I have no opinion. The existence of Concatenative programming language and Stack-oriented programming language seems to indicate that you did the right thing. Debresser (talk) 22:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Just wanted to check that we were allowed/expected to use our judgement and common sense! Tassedethe (talk) 22:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * These are not wp:cfd discussions, where it is required to follow procedure. These categories aren't even correctly tagged (since these merge templates are not for categories). So I took some liberties myself, actually. Debresser (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Using common sense is not only allowed, it is compulsory by policy  Sp in ni ng  Spark  15:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Go tell that to the guys at wp:cfd... Debresser (talk) 17:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I finished nominating all of them. I could still use your help in finishing one of the nominations that involves some more subcategories that are so far untagged. See this proposal. Debresser (talk) 03:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I got them all. Well done on all the others. Tassedethe (talk) 08:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Debresser (talk) 09:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

LisaFab10 Reply
Oh, okay! Sorry it takes me forever to get the hang of things. Well, thanks for sending it!!

LisaFab10 (talk) 19:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks, your appreciation is appreciated. Tassedethe (talk) 08:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Notification
I modified your nomination to reflect what I believe you intended. If I'm not correct, you can let me know. Vegaswikian (talk) 15:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you're completely correct. I just substed the standard template which just gives the one merge target. I should have reformatted it as you've done. Tassedethe (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Apologies
On Khokhar I did not notice the categories were empty. Sorry for the revert. Cheers --Sikh- History 17:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Both were redlinks, but one was completely incorrect for the article. I left the Category:Tarkhan (Punjab) in, perhaps someone will create and populate it. Tassedethe (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Jurycom
Thank you for your help and kindness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.134.136 (talk) 02:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Category sort by tournament name
When making mass edits like, could you make category sort by tournament name? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'll go back and add those. Tassedethe (talk) 12:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It makes the Tour categories look much better. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I've got them all. If you spot others please let me know. Tassedethe (talk) 13:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Derek McGrath (disambiguation)
Hello. Just to let you know this dab has been de-prodded, and Derek McGrath moved to Derek McGrath (actor). I have reverted the changes, pending a discussion on the Talk page, although I agree with the prod. Boleyn3 (talk) 07:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The same editor has also de-prodded Martin Arnold (disambiguation), Daniel Avery (disambiguation) and Tony Anthony (disambiguation), which were all prodded by me for the same reasons you prodded Derek McGrath dab. If you have an opinion on any of these, I've started discussions on their Talk pages. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 09:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have restored the Derek McGrath page to its original state and I put my reasons for this as Talk:Derek McGrath. I can restore any or all of the other pages to their original state if you wish, it would mean that a full WP:RM procedure would be needed to put the disambiguation pages at the undisambiguated name. From the page view statistics I'd probably support Daniel Avery and and Tony Anthony being disambiguation pages (102 vs 110 and 1863 vs 475 respectively) while for Martin Arnold I'd say it should be the filmmaker (649 vs 96). Please let me know your thoughts. Tassedethe (talk) 08:36, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course whatever happens leftover (disambiguation) pages are going to need a full AfD :(. Tassedethe (talk) 08:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Colonial architecture category
Hi, i notice on my watchlist that you removed Category:Colonial architecture from Glastonbury-Rocky Hill Ferry Historic District, and that the category was then empty. Was there a CFD discussion and then a process to empty the category? I don't find any CFD discussion about this. The category seems like a reasonable one, and i think it is or was implemented for many NRHP-listed properties in the U.S. What's wrong with Colonial architecture, i do think it is a style. If there is a name variation that should be used instead, I don't know of it. doncram (talk) 15:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It wasn't deleted, it had never been created, so I removed a red-linked category. The article is American Colonial architecture I think that would be a better name for the category. There is also Spanish Colonial architecture and Dutch Colonial architecture, plus various revivals etc. If you create Category:American Colonial architecture as a subcategory of Category:American architectural styles that seems reasonable. You could tag Category:Colonial architecture with db-author as well. Tassedethe (talk) 15:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying. Probably what you recommend is most reasonable.  There's more volume and more discussants at User talk:Doncram on this topic now, though, could you comment there (perhaps just repeating)?  Thanks! doncram (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Catharsis (disambiguation)
Would you be able to provide a bit more explanation for removal of "* 'catharsis' as a noun, 'cathartic' as an adjective and noun"? I read through the MOS:DABRL link you provided on the history page but do not understand the connection. Thanks. JimScott (talk) 12:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind if I butt in, the wiktionary links weren't removed, but moved into the standard-for-disambiguation-pages Wiktionary box in the upper right. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) I didn't remove them, as they are wiktionary links they are linked using the wiktionary template, which is the default style for disambiguation pages, see WP:MOSDAB. MOS:DABRL relates to the red link to Katharsis (German band) that I removed. Hope that's clear. Tassedethe (talk) 13:11, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Mišši Şeşpĕl
Hello. I just wanted to ask, why did you remove Chuvash categories from Sespel Mishshi? Ali Savatar 15:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That article is correctly categorised in Category:Chuvashian poets which is a subcategory of Category:Chuvashs so it doesn't need to be in that category as well. The Category:Chuvashia is for articles directly related to the place, not for people. Hope that's clear. Tassedethe (talk) 15:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks. I see your point now. There's a lot of mess in the naming of Chuvash-related articles. If Category:Chuvashian poets refers to poets of Chuvash ancestry or those who wrote in Chuvash language, it needs to be renamed into Category:Chuvash poets. Right now it sounds as if it refers to a place (Chuvashia) rather than language or ethnic background. Is there any easy/painless way to rename a category? Ali Savatar 11:36, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid those kind of changes can't be speedied (see WP:CFDS) so they need to be discussed at WP:CFD. I was going to propose some changes myself but if you are familiar with Chuvash-related topics perhaps I should leave it to you. For instance I would merge Category:Chuvashs to Category:Chuvash people, that would be for people of that ethnicity. There is already Category:People from Chuvashia for people from the republic. If there are poets who wrote in the Chuvash language then you could create Category:Chuvash-language poets also. Good luck. Tassedethe (talk) 11:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy category renamings declined
I have declined a huge swathe of renamings here. An objection had been raised, which should trigger a full discussion. Since User:Koavf has acted on the request even though an objection has been made, I do not have the time to make a full listing of the categories, as I have to undo the changes Koavf has implemented pending discussion. I leave it to you to decide how to proceed. I would respectfully suggest that criteria #6 is considered contentious until the current situation is resolved. I apologise for the inconvenience caused. Hiding T 09:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I saw the objection. Consensus on the use of #6 needs to be formed. Tassedethe (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just noticed you've removed some proposals that were not under #6. If you don't mind I will add those back. Tassedethe (talk) 10:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, apologies. Hiding T 10:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Input
Appreciate your input at WP:VPP. Thanks, Hiding T 10:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Robert Wise (disambiguation)
Hello, and thanks for adding to this dab. I was wondering how you found the extra entries? I looked but couldn't see any more. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 15:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I often use the google search keyword "intitle:" and restrict it to the wikipedia domain using "site:". So for Robert Wise I get a search results like this. Hope that's useful. Tassedethe (talk) 15:41, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

It was very useful, thanks. Boleyn3 (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ami Suzuki album
I don't know if you happened on the situation by chance, or if you watch the dab page Around the World, but I did want to thank you for moving the protected page Around the World (Ami Suzuki album). Much appreciated. I see your handle in many places here, and you do lots of good work. Happy editing!-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  05:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thanks. Yes, I was watching the dab page, good work on the cleanup! Tassedethe (talk) 07:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Post-ship
Hi Tassedethe, I reverted your change of Post-ship to "post ship". A Post-ship was a specific classification of vessel unrelated to any postal vessel. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up, but please compare with . The categories haven't been created but articles are being tagged with the non-hyphenated version (not by me!). Tassedethe (talk) 17:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)