User talk:The-Pope/Archive 6

Articles for deletion/Ron Rewald
I've substantially rewritten this article and referenced nearly everything in it. I can't verify a couple of minor items about his football career, but it turns out that's not why he's notable. Please take a look at the new article. If you agree that he now passes WP:N and WP:V please consider revising your contributions to the deletion discussion. Thanks! Pburka (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of András Derecskei (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Derinator)
Thanks! I am not that good in english, but I can understand a lot of things. I found this person links here (http://www.avemariasongs.org/wiki/index.php/Andr%C3%A1s_Derecskei) and here (http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Derecskei,_Andr%C3%A1s), and they link to the article, but I cannot see it in the "What links here" list. What to do now? Derinator (talk) 12:36, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Both of those references are to websites which are not reliable sources, as they are wikis, so anyone could edit them. You need to find a reference in a published book, newspaper or website that is considered a reliable source and add that to the article.  Read WP:CITE and WP:RS to learn more.  You could also post a message at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Hungary or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers - they might be able to assist you.  Where did you find that information in the article?  If it is from your own knowledge, you may want to read WP:OR and WP:COI too.The-Pope (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects
If you have a chance, could you update this page? (looks like you've done it in the past...) I'd be interested in seeing our progress. Thanks!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy Australia Day
 Happy Australia Day! Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!) has bought you a beer and sausages! Sharing sausages and beer is a great way to bond with other Australians. Spread the celebration by chuck a sausage on some else's barbie, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!) 05:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Pavlich vandalism?
Are you sure about this revert at Matthew Pavlich? I looked at the reference and it claims that he is part Irish. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 11:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * When an IP who's only previous edit was "And he loves his nanny" makes a change to nationalities, I don't pay it much attention. Removing Croatian was vandalism, adding Irish was a red herring. all fixed now. The-Pope (talk) 12:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah yeah I didn't see the previous edit by the IP. Thanks for fixing that up anyway, Jenks24 (talk) 12:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Are senior public servants really notable?
I've replied. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply. Pdfpdf (talk) 11:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Jasper Wood
Your Holiness: this article of a BLP musician has had no sources since it's creation June 2007. I don't think the article has ever been flagged as needing sources. I'm new to finding WP:V sources and adding them to articles. When I add BLP unsourced should it be backdated to June 2007? Thanks. Argolin (talk) 05:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it should be tagged with the current month, as there is a project going on to remove the backlog, month by month, and backdating newly tagged articles would make that campaign very difficult - impossible actually. The Wood article actually has an inline link (two actually, but one is a deadlink) for the prizes that he won, so you could convert that internal external link (which are generally not used anymore) into a ref and add a BLP sources tag instead. Thanks for helping out!  Regards, The-Pope (talk) 05:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You contacted WikiProject Canadian music last year regarding the BLP unsourced project. I couldn't help back then;  now:  Corey Cerovsek Harry Adaskin.  Last year our project only had about 2,000 articles.  Today around 5,300.  A rude amount of articles were not even assigned to WikiProject Musicians or to any project for that matter.  The BLP project is only working to 2009, and is why I asked above.  I wasn't sure if you will be pressing a button and removing unsourced BLP's created before a selected date.
 * Two questions: 1) Are you going to have another such push this year?  2) I've seen many BLP articles without any template notifing the projects involved that BLP sources are required.  I know that the Canadian music project has many more than the 51 here .  I can't go through the 5,300 articles as tagging them as unsourced BLP's as these would be the only edits I would do for months.  Your project aware of this?  Is anytihng being done?  Argolin (talk) 17:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * There have been two distinct modes of "attack" to remove the 'known UBLP backlog - WP:URBLP works on the idea that if you can identify them by topic, then people might want to clear topics that interest them - Metal, Australia, Olympics, NFL, Spain, Sweden and many other topics have been completed in this way. The second project is WP:URBLPR, which picks a month, generally from the "back end" and clears them month by month.  Up to month #15 now, 2008 is completely done and eventually they'll get through all of them.  But, as you point out, these projects ONLY deal with the KNOWN and already TAGGED articles.  I've spent a lot of time ensuring that already TAGGED articles are allocated to at least one project, but I haven't been very active in this area lately.  There are some other users who every now and then discover "untagged" UBLPs, and when they do them in batches you see the number of outstanding UBLPs jump - there was a batch done a few days ago - see Jan 31 on this list.  So, we all know about the various problems, but we generally are working on the "known" issues first, thinking that we haven't finished what we know let alone what we don't know, but any help in any of the process steps is greatly appreciated. The-Pope (talk) 02:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Your Eminence: I thought for a second you were have a Dick Cheney moment!  I am a fan of your project Unreferenced BLP Rescue.  If fact, I found your /Resources page and am in the process of developing my own /Sources page.  Citing the Order of Canada honour, Junos, Genie Award's, Gemini Awards, or Gémeaux Awards isn't that hard if you have an example.  It's crazy the number of articles I've seen claiming these awards with no citations.  Thanks again.  Argolin (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Ron Ainsworth for deletion
The article Ron Ainsworth is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sadads (talk) 01:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but that reference you have doesn't appear to be much in the way of coverage. It feels like he doesn't meet significant coverage, Sadads (talk) 01:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Take it up at WP:NSPORTS then.The-Pope (talk) 02:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Swart
Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Infobox
Heh, I was actually just about to ask for your help on this :) But as to your fix, it doesn't seem to have worked (at least for my browser). When I look at Ilija Grgic for example I still see the lines as being messed up. How about you? Jenks24 (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me now, try purging/refreshing the page, or picking another page that you haven't viewed, but has the same infobox? I'm checking the other infoboxes soon.  I'm only learning by copying, so I may stuff it up too!The-Pope (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, I just had to purge properly rather than just refreshing. Seems you are right and your fix has worked. Nice job :) Jenks24 (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, not sure about this one. It may be me again, but take a look at Mark Merenda (for example) and tell me what you see. Jenks24 (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've stuck a br/ in the debut line to fix that, but if there is a long line in the highlights - such as Kevin_Murray_(Australian_rules_footballer), it still looks a bit strange, but that is probably better fixed in the individual article, not in the template. Revert if you think it's damaged them too much, I think it's OK now, but it's tough finding a wide variety of usages, without opening up lots of pages. The-Pope (talk) 16:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I was just going to say that it had was definite improvement. You're right that anything else should probably be fixed on an article by article basis, although in an ideal world we wouldn't use that template in any articles. Anyway, thanks for your fixes, much appreciated. Jenks24 (talk) 16:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Phil Kelly
Greetings! I have reverted your move to the Phil Kelly article; it is standard practice at WP:FOOTY to disambiguate by date of birth rather than nationality. Thanks and regards, GiantSnowman 17:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to move it again, but for simple dab situations like this it seems overly complex - adding info probably not known about the person to the title - readers would know his nationality, they probably don't know his DOB. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_40 from Jan 2010 disagrees too. Is there a guideline page at WP:FOOTY explaining the dab naming rules? I couldn't find one. The-Pope (talk) 02:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Nationality is a major issue when it comes to football - and especially when it comes to describing footballers from Ireland, both Republic of... and Northern... - there's no specific guideline page, and if I'm wrong them I'm wrong - maybe we should start a fresh discussion, either on the Kelly talkpage or over at WP:FOOTY. Regards, GiantSnowman 02:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello
I was the person who made several AFL player articles. I would like to know if there was anyway I could be a wikiafl person, or whatever you call it. PS. Im sorry I haven't made a change in ages-i've been on a really long holiday. Thanks, Canterbury21 (talk) 06:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Sabine Quindou
Please dont delete Sabine Quindou. I had the internet links, however someone erased them. Today I restored them. As you can see, the French wiki has many information for her. 688dim (talk) 11:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

BLP/N
Thanks for removing the name, but I believe the BLP noticeboard has on it, so it doesn't get picked up by search engines. -- Lear's Fool 16:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

ABC Radio
I think you got a lot of your Australian ABC Radio dabs wrong - ABC Radio National is a specialist "serious" channel, ABC Local Radio, is the collective name for the many local stations that are the main ABC stations. Sport, especially (ABC Grandstand) is almost always on Local Radio, not National (even if it broadcasted nationally).The-Pope (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I'll go back and make the appropriate corrections. I'm regretting I started this. I hadn't realised when I started just how many links there were to ABC Radio. Even though there has been a name change, it might have been simpler to leave Citadel Media as the primary target, and keep a hatnote pointing to the disamb page.  SilkTork  *YES! 18:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Norco bite AFD
Greetings! I dropped in on the Norco bite AFD and was looking at the article and its history before weighing in. I noticed that you'd welcomed the new editor who created the article and also notified s/he that the article had been PRODded at the same time. Then, you'd reverted a new addition to the article by the same editor as vandalism. While I agree that the addition appeared to be composed of personal recollections of an historical incident involving manufacture of the ice cream treat in question, the edit was hardly vandalism. I beg your pardon, but it strikes me that the new editor may be rather put off by the rather harsh treatment experienced when trying to create a first article. I agree the article, as presently constituted, is almost as far as one can get from a "featured article," but it strikes me as an honest attempt to add content to the encyclopedia (and from the Southern Hemisphere, no less, a potential counterweight to the somewhat Northern bias). We all started here sometime with some little edit. Isn't there a better way to encourage the newbies and guide them toward ever-increasing quality in their efforts to contribute? Geoff Who, me?  18:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but writing about "the St. Madeleines Incident in 1993" is great for a creative writing class but it so far removed from what wikipedia is meant to be, that I did consider it inappropriate, hence the deletion requests. When they inserting the story twice (ie repeated it twice in the one article), however, only then did I call it vandalism. It probably a couple of kids thinking it would be funny to make up a story to put on here.  WP:TW automatically does a welcome at the same time as the PROD.  I don't think we're missing out on much if they never edit again. The-Pope (talk) 22:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Field of Chaos
Thanks for the introduction. I am working on getting the references and other information with more detail for the page in the next couple of days. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any other concerns. I'd like to work on more original content pages given time and the pointers you provided were very good. Nsembledbougies (talk) 03:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I think I have addressed your concerns here Talk:Field_of_Chaos. Please let me know if I need to add anything else. Thanks for all your help. Nsembledbougies (talk) 07:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Matthew Lloyd Edits
Hello,

I just wanted to say that I am in no way connected to Matthew Lloyd or the publishers of his upcoming biography so it was definitely not intended to be a form of advertising, just merely stating an addition to his media work. I do see your point; however, and I will not add it to the page until after its publication, if at all.

However, I must say that I do not understand the need to hide the names of his daughters. Both Lloyd and his wife have spoken about their children in numerous articles as well as on television and radio. Minors obviously need to be protected, but it is not as if the name of their school has been published (which would of course be inappropriate and more than a little creepy) and in this instance the parents have given their permission to have their kids names out in the public domain. Not to mention it is very common for celebrities to have their children listed on their Wikipedia page. Fellow former footballers such as Nathan Buckley, Warren Tredrea and James Hird all do, as do other celebrities like Gwyneth Paltrow, Danni Minogue and Colin Firth just to name a few random examples, so what is so different about the Lloyd case?

I've never posted on a talk page before, so I hope this was done in the correct format.

Regards, AntiqueInk (talk) 03:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)AntiqueInk

Response to your msg
Hi,

Just to clarify, I did not create a page about myself for advertising purposes. There was a page already established by someone else about a band I was a member of which had an incorrect link directing people that clicked on my name to another person with a similiar name. I was only trying to set that record straight. There are many sources validating the basic items I included on the post. I tried to add them as footnotes, but I must have not done so correctly.

The Fuzztones Album "in Heat" 1989 RCA Records asin: b0008fn9h The Fuzztones IN Heat song Book Cherry Lane Publishing 1990 ISBN089524537X

Max's kansas City, Glamour,Rock N roll By Steven Kasher

Speedies HP Commerical http://www.palebear.com/let-me-take-your-photo-the-speedies-hp-commercial/2005/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Speediejohn (talk • contribs) 18:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Denyse
Sorry, edit conflicted some sources on your PROD. No worries here, have a great week! --joe deckertalk to me 15:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Michael Willson
Hi, why not just edit Michael Willson back to a redirect? No one messed with it for almost five months and he is mentioned in Gladiators (UK TV series), if it becomes a problem we can always semi-protect it. With the BLPprod we are going to have to look at it for ten days. J04n(talk page) 17:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry to step in here, but you won't have to look at it for 10 days, I had to decline the BLPPROD because the article's creation predates March 18, 2010. *makes a funny face at our policy rulebook*  I added two sources and tagged for notability, but I wouldn't contest putting the redirect back, or sending this to AfD, either.  I thought I was going to send it to AfD myself, but with the sources I'm entirely neutral.  --joe deckertalk to me 18:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said on the talk page, I consider the article creation date to be yesterday, as yesterday was the date that the unreferenced content was added, not the date that it was first made.  Apart from that, I  have no problem with any of your actions.The-Pope (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I blew that, totally missed your talk page note. I'll take the idea you present and give it some thought, but I do apologize for not poked at the Talk page.  --joe deckertalk to me 23:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I was being a bit The-Pope (talk) 23:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Cheers, --joe deckertalk to me 00:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The whole point of only making the BLPprod for the new articles was to prevent the mass deletions. As we get the backlog down now to a workable number it will have to be revisited and it will make sense to apply it all BLPs. J04n(talk page) 02:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Contributor copyright investigations
Hi The-Pope. You warned for his close paraphrasing and copyright violations at John T. Olson. I've started a CCI for the user at Contributor copyright investigations due to his extensive history of copyright violations. If you have more evidence to add, feel free to do so. Cunard (talk) 06:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jayden Pitt
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Courtyard Cricket
One may recall the speedy deletion of Courtyard Cricket. If shorter pages, such as Street cricket with less references, less external links, less See Also links and less pages linking to it than Courtyard Cricket, one must ask why Courtyard Cricket is an unacceptable page. Apparently it does not comply with Wikipedia guidelines? If so, fair enough, but further clarification may be required so that users of Wikipedia can make the appropriate changes. Courtyard Cricket is a legitimate sport in Tasmania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gravybabytrain (talk • contribs) 03:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:MADEUP, WP:V and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Referred to WT:CRIC for a third opinion. The-Pope (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

AfD
Bit stiff with this this close. Though it was going to be "no consensus" personally. Jenks24 (talk) 09:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Meh, in future, I think we have enough consensus/precedents to just redirect to the list of players article, and bypass AfD altogether.The-Pope (talk) 10:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Ben Stratton
Hi, I'm here regarding my PROD on the article Ben Stratton. Although he has played an AFL game, I believe Ben is not notable enough to guarantee a Wikipedia biography. According to my research, there are no info on his childhood and personal life, and he's only been in the system for exactly one year, Round 3 2010 – Round 3 2011. Do you think the article can get pass the current "Stub" status? Alright you can say that he's still new to the system and that he's got probably 8 years to go (haven't thought of that yet). Anyway, if that's the case, we'll have to wait a few years before we can get a reasonable article. I'm taking my PROD back. Sp33dyphil Ready • to • Rumble  01:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
I've just logged in for the first time in two months. Thank you for your advice (8 February) about the current standards for referencing BLP's. I'll observe those standards from now on. David Cannon (talk) 02:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Hi, I noticed you made an edit to the above page. Just thought you may like to know. Cheers, GetDownAdam (talk) 03:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Computer scientists are archers now?
Hi there, I assume you're the man to talk to about WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/UBLPs by sport. If you look at the Archery section you may notice that there aren't actually any archers in it, only computer scientists and economists! Anyway, it's not a big deal or anything, but I thought you might like to know (and possibly be able to fix it). Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 22:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed it a while ago - because there isn't a WP:ARCHERY, we need to use the categories, and the DASHBot system can't do a recursive search down a category tree, so you need to use a wildcard search in the category name. Unfortunately *archers* also picks up *researchers*, so you get some false positives. I'm not sure how many other people are using those lists... not many from what I've tracked -  I think most either use the random button, the WP:URBLPR by month approach or do their own catscans. The-Pope (talk) 07:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah ok then. Yeah, it's not a real problem, I was just a bit confused by it. Anyway, thanks for explaining and, yeah, I don't think a whole lot of people use that list anyway (that said, I find the sports one fairly useful). Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Western Front
If it's 9/10 years, isn't this the show that started in 2002 with Dennis Cometti when he went to STW9 from TVW7? I can't remember the name of that show but it was at that time a brand new WA-produced footy show with a mixture of the two WA teams plus the WAFL and a lot of "golden greats" type stuff. Orderinchaos 23:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, it appears the WF show was a product of the same deal, but not the same show. When Nine and Ten won the rights off Seven for the AFL, locally, Dennis Cometti switched to STW9. Nine pitched a new show, "Cometti Live" (a personal project of Cometti's which he'd had the idea of for some years), to take advantage of this. (A lengthy interview of Cometti is in ) It first aired at 10:10pm on Monday 25 March 2002 and had a talkback format. Then Ten started "The Western Front", hosted by Tim Gossage, at 4:30pm on Saturday 30 March 2002 as a "light, bright magazine show". Quote from article: "It will be totally WA, with presenters Lachy Reid, Tania Armstrong and Clint Wheeldon, as well as Gossage, and is to focus on The Eagles and Dockers and the WAFL." Cometti Live only appears to have lasted for one season, it was canned in favour of a footy panel which, as far as I can tell, never eventuated.  On 30 November 2003, it was announced that Daniel Chick would be signed to Ten and his commitments would include work for the Western Front, and the article noted Paul Hasleby was already there. (Article is called "News coup", Sunday Times, p.2, same date.) Yay for Factiva. Orderinchaos 23:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Cometti Live was a later night show, WF was always a filler on Sat arvo. Wish I had Factiva access!  There was an inside cover story a few weeks ago about the "Western Front Curse", in that almost ever player that they've signed up has had a serious injury - normally a knee.  Might be worth a mention if I can find the old paper - I think it was a few days after LeCras got injured.  If you could find a source for the "only non-news Ten show filmed in Perth" I'd be very happy. The-Pope (talk) 01:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Cricketvictoria - you beat me to it
Ave!

I guess as long as it's someone who likes Cricket in Victoria, and they don't pass themselves off as the organisation, it's fine. And on a related note, Google "Sydney Thunder" and see what gets the most hits (no, I'm not talking about the boat-ride company).

--Shirt58 (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Street
I will not gie up on nominating the article for deletion. You may be an adminstrator and love the fact that the "community" agrees or keeping this non-notable person there, but you aren't a know it all person either. That's all i will say. PS: don't reply on my talk page. and besides, you comment is so condescending.Other dictionaries are better (talk) 20:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the feedback
Hi, thanks for the feedback. the infobox i have used is the template used for Barry Hall. i tried the NEW template but i seemed to have errors when entering the relevant information. the career stats are only for seasons completed and i agree that constantly updating the stats during the current season will be a pain. the idea for the stats i took from the Joel Selwood page which is well created. However, i'm ok if any of my changes/additions are removed.(ColRad (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2011 (UTC))

Speedy deletion of Template:Hawthorn Hawks current squad
A tag has been placed on Template:Hawthorn Hawks current squad requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. The-Pope (talk) 13:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for support on Kim Duthie
Your support/guidance is much appreciated. I've dabbled in Wikipedia for a while, but I guess this is the first contentious article I've had a major hand in... --Ian Page (talk) 14:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry, I will try and pay more attention to the external links section and try and use the proper tag next time. As for notability, the agreed standards for notability are different for every subject; I was not aware that all Olympic winners are considered notable, considering it may fall under WP:1E for the lesser-known athletes. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:53, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It is extremely unlikely that an Olympic winner would turn up on the day and win gold, without winning other national competitions etc. Many/some believe that all olmpics competitors, not just winners, are notable - you can see what is generally considered notable in many major sports at WP:NSPORTS.  Regards, The-Pope (talk) 05:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Stats rleague
Ah yes, another source that I hadn't thought of for match totals. Considering we use it in almost every VFL/AFL player bio we have and I've never seen it have the stats wrong once, do you know why it isn't technically considered a reliable source for GA/FA? Jenks24 (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Because it isn't officially sanctioned/approved or owned by a media mogul-the shared website (rleague) doesn't help either? Maybe one day they'll do a cricinfo-wisden style deal, but I doubt it. The guy who runs it posts here sometimes, mainly as an IP though.  To me it's the most reliable of all of the detailed stats style sources. KT's footystats is the other site that suffers because of it's on a freeserver and doesn't show up high in google searches, but again I'd trust it above most daily newspapers. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. On a lighter note, if you look really quickly at McAusten's talk page, you'll notice that my last post there wasn't removed immediately. Wikipedia continues to surprise me... Jenks24 (talk) 16:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

QClash
Instead of deleting, why not merge them. Q Clash has the background and a good summary. Sp33dyphil Ready • to • Rumble  12:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Feel free to retrieve it. I thought the other one had more relevant info and the generic background section didn't add much to the article.  If you disagree, I'm not going to remove it - I'm unlikely to even watchlist the article.  I just didn't want to have two articles existing on the same topic. The-Pope (talk) 12:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice bug :)
That might be my favorite trophy so far. :) --joe deckertalk to me 17:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Tendai Mzungu
Materialscientist (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Lester
Sorry, I just noticed that you had expanded Ryan Lester before I nuked it. If you think it's worth restoring, I'll be happy to do so. --Bongwarrior (talk) 14:12, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please do. Probably about half of the articles created have played at the fully pro level, so are notable, but of course there was nothing really worth keeping. I expanded one and left a message on the guys talk page to hopefully show him the minimum requirements aren't really that hard to achieve. The-Pope (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All done, sorry for the mix up. --Bongwarrior (talk) 14:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No probs... when I saw the last bunch you deleted the other day I was almost going to ask you about undeleting some of them, but guessed that they would be not worth it. The-Pope (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

About this edit
On Valerie Barsom... In my opinion the notability has little to do with the references. The three references only refer to this individual pulling out of the 1996 election. Is every person who has been in an American state legislature in the past notable? There are no mentions of Barsom in Google News and other than listed as being a Mass. legislator in directories, Barsom only has one mention in Google Books, (in connection with 1995's "Abortion politics in the American states"). Her listings on Google seem to consist of being listed as a lobbyist, as a lawyer and as a political contributor. I think that Barsom fails Notability (politicians) but would welcome your opinion. Shearonink (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I assumed that being on a state legislature members would be notable - they are in Australia, maybe the US has many more who do nothing? I don't trust Google searches at all for info in the 80s and 90s as it is too soon for "old archiving" (ie the copyright holders still think it's worth something, and archivists are still working back in the previous centuries/around the World Wars) but too old for "standard archiving" (ie the pages are no longer online, if they were ever online in the first place).   My feelings on the WP:POLITICIAN and WP:NSPORTS type of guidelines is that if you can prove from a basic directory list or similar that the person met a minimum standard - played a game, was elected etc - then there is likely, somewhere, at some time, some fairly detailed information on them to satisfy the WP:GNG.  It may not be online, but it probably exists. The first line of WP:POLITICIAN is Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature so if she was elected, then she's notable by that standard, and I'm willing to give the offline sources the benefit of the doubt.  If you can prove that she wasn't elected to a legislature, then that is very different, and I'd be all for deletion if significant coverage is not able to be found - you only get the benefit of the doubt if you prove you meet the WP:POLITICIAN standard. The-Pope (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Re:state legislators... here are 50 state legislatures in the American system, plus the legislatures for Puerto Rico, Guam plus the other Territories, etc....I guess in this instance I actually don't agree with the guideline's implications. Not every state legislator in the history of the United States has achieved notability simply  because they were elected by their district.  I have nothing against state legislators, I have relatives who have been elected but in my opinion they don't deserve an article, their legislative career was just not notable enough.  I get what you're saying about the Google searches, maybe there's some news I'm missing.  Barsom still has a legal practice and has been in business since 1996(?)...but so far I can find no mentions meriting notability online. Part of my issues with the article relate to the edit history, since an editor called "Vbarsom" has done some recent edits and another editor popped up during Vbarsom's edits and only edited the article edit history. Shearonink (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't necessarily agree with it either (and in this exact instance, don't care either - I'm just on the WP:URBLPR project!) but it's the guidelines we have. There is a note at the top of the guideline pages, saying that they aren't definitive, either way, in or out, but a two-term legislator would more than likely have done something notable during her term or campaigns, surely!  I'm also convinced that most some edits done to people who were active/notable only in the pre-2000 world are done by themselves, friends or family members, unless they are part of a list/team/progression such as Olympians, high ranking politicians, or actors on movies/TV shows that have had sequels/re-runs etc. Take this whereever you want, but I'd doubt you'd get much support at an AfD... not that I'd be likely to vote either way. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 16:21, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure Barsom served a full two terms, seems to have left before her second one was up to then serve for less than a year (as a lawyer?) at the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and then left that position to be a lawyer in private practice and to be a lobbyist. If Barsom seems notable enough to another editor that's fine by me, I had no particular intention of taking my concerns to AfD. Shearonink (talk) 17:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

MacAusten's hidden comments
In case you hadn't noticed, I've just initiated a discussion on Talk:2011 AFL season about User:McAusten's somewhat over-enthusiastic comments. Feel free to contribute. HiLo48 (talk) 02:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Move of "Prof Dr Don Craig"
I'm not sure that displacing the current Don Craig article with Prof Dr Don Craig, merely because one is fictional and the other is not, is particularly cut-and-dry. To err on the side of caution, I've removed the speedy deletion request from Don Craig and moved Don Craig (Days of our Lives) back. If you really believe this move should be done, create a move discussion. Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 06:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * When I nominated it for a G6 move, I admit I hadn't properly reviewed the Prof Dr article, I just saw the incorrect title and the plenty of references. When I did look closer, I found a number of problems - likely autobiography, at best obscure references, at worst deliberately unrelated and random references and a lot of self-promotion.  So, I have no problems with your rejection of the G6 and Prodding of the article. Not sure which articles I hate more - only in-universe notable fictional characters or self promoting auto bios! Regards, The-Pope (talk) 08:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Altering date on Michael D. Phelan
I disagree with you setting the date of the tag to June 2011 but I will not revert you again. I have already had this discussion with another editor, see User talk:Tassedethe/Archive_2, and I pointed out there that my edit is in line with the behaviour of Smackbot, and is an approved feature of AutoWikiBrowser. Your edit has moved a longtime unreferenced BLP, something which Wikipedia is trying very hard to clear up, from the front of the queue to the back. This page was correctly tagged as unreferenced in December 2009. Unfortunately because nobody added the Living people category it was not placed in the unref BLP category at that time. I feel your edit is detrimental to all our efforts to improve Wikipedia in regard to unreferenced BLPs. Tassedethe (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You must be joking. Nothing I have done in the past 18 months on wikipedia has been detrimental to UBLPs. A cleanup tag is a cleanup tag. Some use "by month", some use "by creation", some use "by topic".  They will all get done.  You see it being pushed to the back of the queue, I see it taking it's rightful place in that queue. The-Pope (talk) 01:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Dabomb87 (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Spot on
Two spots - spot on! SatuSuro 15:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If I seem obscure there - the amount of untended weeds in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AlexNewArtBot/AustraliaSearchResult/archive50 is quite revealing SatuSuro 15:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * So with both wolter and alex new dead- are you aware of any bots that might exist that can help? SatuSuro 05:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Bah answred my question at oz noticeboard - sorry to have bothered SatuSuro 05:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Michael H. Allen
The speedy deletion nomination for Michael H. Allen showed up on my watch list because I happened to be watching User talk:RashBold due to a conversation last summer. I don't think it is fair to User:RashBold to characterize the article (at least as reflected in mirror sites that still show it) as an attack piece. In my experience RashBold is a good-faith editor who writes on Philippine and military history topics. He does not contribute much anymore and this was an older contribution lacking sources. A quick Google search could provide some, and extend the story a little.Dankarl (talk) 19:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is confusing and unfortunate that WP:CSD has the "title" attack page as the detailed description includes the following section, which is the provision that I used when nomininating it: "Biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced." Feel free to recreate a fully sourced version, but be aware of the WP:BLP1E guidelines. The-Pope (talk) 22:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Perhaps unfortunately, I don't do BLPs as a matter of policy.
 * 2) If the template has the effect of disparging a legitimate editor for an article written at a time when standards were different then perhaps a modification of the template, a manual explanation, or a personal note is in order.Dankarl (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Any legitimate editor would have no problems getting most admins to undelete the article if the referencing issues were addressed. The potential effect on the subject of the article must be of higher priority than the effect on an editor.The-Pope (talk) 03:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You miss my point. I do not give a rip for the article. The characterization of the article as an attack piece violates WP:Good faith and is disputable on its face. The criterion speaks of the tone of the article; in my view the tone was neutral (again, I can judge only from mirror sites).  The content was negative due to the incident that occasioned the article. To say that it cannot be modified or mitigated is incorrect: the article could be speedily deleted on other grounds, or put up for AFD. Or perhaps you could simply post your first response to Rashbold's talk page. Dankarl (talk) 13:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I wrote out a big long response defending my choice to G10 in and how it does qualify under the negative unreferenced BLP part and I never actually intended to call it an attack page ... but then I looked at Rashbold's talk page and saw that the standard talk page notice that Twinkle leaves basically only mentions attack pages and not the other portion of G10, I now see that from your view point (the user talk page) it was harsh - but it wasn't what I intended from my view point (the unreferenced negative BLP).  I think that this might need a separate twinkle button and notice - "G10 attack" and "G10 neg unsourced BLP". Interesting the actual article template notice Db-g10 doesn't mention "attack page" at all.  (But Rashbold's been inactive since Aug last year, so it isn't much of an issue) Regards, The-Pope (talk) 13:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Apart from any eventual modification of Twinkle, I continue to have three concerns:
 * 1) I think you have misinterpreted the G10 guidelines by confusing content with tone. Compare the G10 heading "Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose " (emphasis mine).
 * 2) Rational discussion of the article is now possible only for admins - the content is otherwise inaccessible
 * 3) User:RashBold is now identified incorrectly as the author of an attack page and threatened with a block. It seems to me quite possible that some other admin, seeing that prior history, would then judge some other borderline  questionable case more harshly and perhaps initiate action for such a block.
 * It seems to me some more specific remedial action is required. Specifically I would suggest that a) the notice on User Talk:RashBold be removed by an admin with an edit summary indicating the page in question was incorrectly identified as an attack page, and b) the article be restored and put through AFD.
 * To reiterate: I am not arguing to save the article; there are some good arguments against keeping it even it it were referenced. My concerns are that fair procedures be followed and that G10 interpretation be clarified.Dankarl (talk) 20:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Richard Daniel Roman
Please read my explanation for removing PROD at the article's deletion page.Aloiiyii (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Please read my response to your comments.Aloiiyii (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Lester
I have replied to your message on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:22, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Thanks
You're welcome, and the praise is well earned. You asked Jimbo if he ever thought this task would be completed without another deletion spree. I would say that with another deletion spree, it never would have been completed. Thus:

Ayumu Nakazawa
Hi. I added some sources in the article Ayumu Nakazawa, so I removed PRD tag. Did you propose the deletion for notability?--Mujaki (talk) 16:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding refs, but as I know nothing at all about Japanese video game voice actors, I have no idea what is a reliable source for them, especially when it's in Japanese. But blogs generally aren't sufficient. I'll never look at the article again, so please continue to improve it, but I'm that's enough for me for now. The-Pope (talk) 17:06, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Laurie Young
Sorry, my mistake - mixed it up with WP:CSD. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 23:27, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Bruce Andrew

 * (1) Thanks for the tip!
 * (2) What a lovely photograph! (Given the style of his guernsey (a much earlier vintage than his apparent age in the photo), and his apparent age, and that it was taken in a park (rather than during a match), and that the man behind him is in Fitzroy gear, I feel certain that this was taken post-war in somewhere like Fawkner Park (pity it is a "Getty Image", because it really would give a modern reader some idea of him "in action".
 * (3) I created a link within the article's references to the piece.Lindsay658 (talk) 22:23, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Matt Norman
Hi Pope, I am sure you mean well, but this to-ing and fro-ing about tag semantics for an article that seriously needs work puts me off. It is a bit like putting a parking ticket on a fire engine. How about investing some time to help me improve the article? Superp (talk) 08:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You call it semantics, I call it confusing, misleading and inappropriate tagging. I have little interest in an article about a doco filmmaker, but those who do now know that the style of citations needs improving. There are lots of different cleanup tags available to be used, and we should use the most appropriate ones, not just the highest profile ones. The-Pope (talk) 09:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Pope, thanks for responding. Rather than discussing the colour of the hazardous sign, I would like to work together with you to fix the leaking roof. Until that moment, I am leaving the article as is. All the best. Superp (talk) 11:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * For the past year, well actually 18 months, I've worked my butt off trying to "fix" the problem of unreferenced Biographies of Living People, that some admins (and Jimbo Wales) thought was such a major problem that they should be deleted, without going through the usual CSD/PROD/AFD process. You can read all about it at WP:BLPRFC and the responses at WP:URBLP and WP:URBLPR.  I know that I'm not creating fully referenced, complete, well written feature articles.  I'm doing the foundation work - checking that the main claims to notability are referenced and there is no really bad unreferenced stuff in the article.  For most of the 1000s of articles that I've reviewed, I've only added a ref or two, then marked them as still needing more sources and moved on.  Other than Australian footballers or some sportspeople or other Australians that I know well and feel I can significantly contribute to, I've rarely done much actual improvement to the articles.  I've also tagged 1000s of talk pages with WikiProject tags, so that hopefully people who are interested in that topic will see the still problematic article on a Cleanup list and will work on it.  To move on from your parking ticket analogy.  I see myself as the guy in the car yard checking that the tyres aren't bald and there is oil in the engine.  I'm not the one checking the wheel alignment, how clean the pistons are, optimising the air-fuel ratio or the switching to a better set of tyres.  It takes all types, but we all make a difference in different ways.  Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 12:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you're the guy who makes all those discussion links go blue so I click them hoping to find a thriving community of involved editors, just to find project tags *ducks*. Actually, that was only half-joking. Indeed, there are multiple perspectives to everything. Respect your effort, just beware of wiki-burnout. All the best. Superp (talk) 16:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Kyoung Jun Lee
Yes, it was certain pretty awful, and prod was a reasonable option (I think G11, might have been also) But I'm used to rewriting these academic bios, and try to rewrite one or two a week. This is the one for this week. I'm about halfway thru. Your tagging is perfectly correct, of course, & I'm removing the tags as I deal with therm. In as few more days, if you are not satisfied, try AfD, but he technically does seem to pass it. (I could of course have equally well let it get deleted.

In my experience, many COI academic bios are over-expansive like this, but an equal number don't say nearly enough. I'm really not sure of the strategy for these. On the one hand, it would be easier to delete it and let the author try to rewrite,  on the other, he is from an under-represented country at Wikipedia. My actual choice of which way to go can depend on external factors--today, I'm in the middle of what may be some major issues, and it can be relaxing to something totally routine.

I'm going into this detail to emphasise as strongly as I can that I think you were very right to call attention to this, and it couldn't possibly be kept as it was.  DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've also got no problems with what you've done (group hug time!!) and have actually now un-watched it, now that I see you are on the job. It is one of those blurred lines as to what constitutes unreferenced for academics. I lean towards allowing a faculty ref as being OK, normally want more than just a list of papers/books written.  I went a bit tick-happy on the twinkle tagging, but I wanted to make sure that if you did move onto something else, it would be left on plenty of clean up lists.  Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 05:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Stuart Flynn PROD
Yes, I reckon you're right. There used to be more WP:RS refs available online than there are now, and those that would meet RS criteria are now either dead or archived material; he seems to have kind of receded in terms of stuff to reference and I can't think of any means where notability could be adequately asserted in the sense of WP:BAND/WP:BIO. Whilst it's likely now academic, what is very odd is the article history shows as though I'm the article creator when I'm certain I wasn't &mdash; yet I can't find any WP:REVDEL or WP:CP that might have happened, and there's no REVDELed revisions (maybe oversighted?). Not that it really matters, I suppose. --NicholasTurnbull &#124; (talk) 09:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Doggies
Hello, Footscray Football Club (as ever, thus FFC on the back of their jumpers) now trading as Western Bulldogs so your move correct, not sure the article explains. Cheers (Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)).

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 12:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Sarcasm
"In regards to your comment 'Only Test cricket can literally be termed first-class.' - will you be complaining to WP:BASEBALL about their World Series not including most of the world?

''WP:COMMONNAME might be useful reading. We're here to reflect reality, not correct it. WP:CRIN is reflective of the level of cricket that we can assume that somewhere, at some time (maybe not googleable) there is significant coverage of most, if not all players at that level. We use databases like cricketarchive to only prove if a player reaches that level, not to prove that they've received significant coverage. I have no idea about the notability of cricket in previous centuries, but those who do have made their choices and I'm happy to trust them.''"

I'm sure you remember posting the above on the cricket talk page and it does your credibility no good at all. Your first paragraph is sarcasm and, in case you haven't worked it out yet, sarcasm is childish. There is nothing clever or even funny about being sarcastic. Okay?

Second, you say that the project is "here to reflect reality" and in the next sentence you say WP:CRIN reflects something that is assumed. That is contradictory.

Third, you admit you know nothing about the area under discussion and yet you insist that those who have made their choices are right, even though the discussion on the deletion page shows that there is disagreement among people who all seem to be members of the project. Sorry, but that is neither a helpful nor a constructive contribution.

I would not normally respond to someone like this but I'm quite sure that the site disapproves of sarcastic comments (see WP:CIVIL) and I suggest you think about how you communicate with new and relatively new editors who are asking questions and raising concerns in future. It may be that my concern is groundless and that I have misunderstood something; and if someone can show me that in a constructive way (as User:Johnlp is trying to do), then I will happily accept the explanation and close the issue. --Mike (chat) 07:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If you hadn't made the comment about only test cricket being first class, I wouldn't have made any response. My reply was to highlight that cricket isn't the only sport to "redefine" commonly used words to have a sport specific meaning. I have also had a lot of experience with people misunderstanding the intent of the WP:NSPORTS guidelines, so tried to explain that. The-Pope (talk) 08:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Dancing Did
I've added the sources I found - could you take another look? If you decide the AfD should run its course that's up to you, but if you're happy that it should be kept then we could perhaps save others from spending time on it. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 14:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the refs, but can you confirm which part of WP:MUSICBIO they qualify under. Are the listings in those books "significant coverage"?  Does the #25 on an Independent Chart count?  Are they really notable? The-Pope (talk) 14:50, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The coverage in both Strong's and Larkin's book is 'significant'. They therefore pass criterion 1 of WP:BAND and WP:GNG. Up to you.--Michig (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I'll let it run for a few days and see if anyone else has an opinion. I'm not going to counter point any of your points in the AfD or anything, but as I don't have access to the books and google books doesn't have any previews of them I don't think I'll withdraw the nom.  The blurb on Strong says that it covers over 2000 bands... are they all really notable by our standards? The-Pope (talk) 15:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That's 2,000 bands (the most important 'alternative' bands from the 1970s through to the 2000s) in 1,000 A4-ish pages, in small type with text in 2 columns, with a bio/history, lineups, and discography for each. The vast majority are notable by our standards, probably all of them if offline music press is searched.--Michig (talk) 15:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Gerald Burton-Batty & WP:BLPPROD
You removed the prod blp template from the Gerald Burton-Batty article with the edit comment "Sherdog is a ref". I don't see where in the article where Sherdog is being used as a reference to verify a statement in the article. The references section of the article with its reflist template is showing as blank. Sherdog is used as an external link, but not as a reference in the article. Is there a reason why you removed the template even though the cites no references? --TreyGeek (talk) 00:56, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If you totally ignore the wikipedia specific formating and style guides and think like an absolute newby, read the article with a BLPPROD label - it says that the article "appears to have no references". If I was a new editor, I'd look at the article and think there is a link to Sherdog in the infobox and also at the end of the article, both of which verify that there is a person of this name that competes at Mixed Martial Arts.  We shouldn't use BLPPRODs or BLP unsourced or similar to do jobs that they aren't meant to do.  If you want the refs to be improved in style, use citation style or no footnotes.  If you think that he isn't notable enough use WP:PROD or notability.  If you want more refs then BLP sources or sprinkle fact tags through the article.  Use the right tool for the right task, and not the sledgehammer for everything. The-Pope (talk) 01:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. If you are satisfied with removing the BLP Prod template and don't want to restore it, I'll put the article up for AfD here in a little bit.  Thanks for the response.  --TreyGeek (talk) 01:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No probs - the line between referenced/unreferenced isn't as black and white as it should be, unfortunately. Everytime we try to define whether articles reffed to only personal websites/myspace/facebook/faculty sites/sport leagues/other databases etc are referenced or not, there is no consensus.  We've had BLPPROD for over a year now, so technically there should be no unreferenced BLPs - but there are over 200 still around - mainly because of this uncertainty.  Unreferenced BLPs has been one of the main issues of the past 18 months, but the backlog is almost gone.  I'm guessing that BLP notability in general might be the next high profile target - WP:NSPORTS and the other topic specific guidelines will probably be examined in minute detail over the coming months. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 01:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I suppose I take a more hard-core approach to referenced vs unreferenced (if it doesn't / cite a reference it is unreferenced in my opinion obviously). This mainly comes from my experiences in the MMA Wikiproject where someone will create a practically worthless article about their favorite "up and coming" fighter or a fighter will create an article about them-self (as in this case).  In doing so, the article creator will make no attempt at showing the subject of the article is notable and they will cite no sources; the article is simply a two or three sentence lead, an infobox, and a record history table.  Thus my frustration when I see, what I believe to be, a worthless article about a non-notable person.  I see this as a never-ending problem and I believe there will always be unreferenced BLPs and BLPs about non-notable people.  My apologies if I was a little harsh with you out of my frustrations.  Good luck to you with your projects.  --TreyGeek (talk) 02:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I am all for each project running their own areas in their own way - after all I have real idea if Sherdog is reliable or what your notability level is (my preferred area is WP:AFL, which at least has tightly defined squads/draft system and lots of news coverage and online databases) - but like I said - use the right tool for the right task. Be viscous if need be with AfDs, notability tags and the like, but PROD is meant for "uncontroversial" deletions only, and we've discussed BLPPROD above.  Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Hottest 100
I cannot believe that they believe that charting in the Hottest 100 isn't significant or notable. I was under the impression that it is now the largest music poll in the world - how could that not be significant.Dan arndt (talk) 01:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Guys, seeing the comment above I thought it was better to respond here than on the deletion page. The objection to polls is that they are easy to rig (Zimbabwe, anybody?), It only takes a determined artist/record co/promotor/demented fan to rig the results of music-type polls and they become worthless. Hottest 100 may be the largest music poll in the world, but, guys, haven't you heard, size isn't everything? On a personal note I am not sure that 78 in ANY chart or poll is actually notable, but I know the tide is against me on the this. At least the Little Birdy article is now more that what most song articles are, which is pretty much only "this song exists and it charted" - and those kind of articles would be much more useful in a well-written discography than stand alone articles. Well done again, for the improvements to the article, a little about the song, a sample and that article is heading right up the WP:Songs charts. Cheers. Have fun and keep editing! --Richhoncho (talk) 08:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Esky
Are you the admin who has been appointed to resolved the motorised esky dispute?

But it seems that both you and the multiple reverter are both Australian. In this NPOV. ?

Note that I only made 2 reversions whereas my contribution has been reverted 3 times. QuentinUK (talk) 16:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin. You've been warned about, not "convicted" of edit warring. WP:BRD indicates you should be at the discuss stage - and all of us Aussies, who actually use and own eskies know that a motorised one is a one-off variation that is not notable.  Would an article on coins include that they can be thrown at soccer goalkeepers? Should the cricket article mention Sussex's 399 the other day?  Should USB drive mention that it can be used in extortion bomb threats? Trust us, it isn't notable.  The-Pope (talk) 16:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

There is already a page which indicates these are not one offs. Although this is about generic rideable coolers. Ride_on_Cooler. I suppose this is the correct place to mention their legal status. QuentinUK (talk) 16:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * By all means expand or improve that page - it is in a very bad state and should really be titled Ride on cooler. Back to your original edits, it would have been better if you had started adding it as "Some eskies have been converted to be motorised..." rather than the definitive tone that you used that misrepresented the importance of a motorised esky. The-Pope (talk) 16:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Other than saying it arrived from ebay in kit form it the original article, The Daily Telegraph usually a RS, did not say this was a modification. The article does use lower case "esky" which may indicate it is not referring to the brand, (after checking ebay it appears they are coming from China). Also collaborative editing means correcting any mistake and not just reverting saying "it doesn't" (require a license), when that is what the driver was convicted of. QuentinUK (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Ray Ruffin
Hi. I've contested the PROD you slapped on Ray Ruffin. The bio, before I editted it down, was heavily promotional, and the accomplishments were inflated. I suspect this guy really is under the bar for notability, but the production work on hit singles are verifiable, and the uncited assertions of awards is enough that this should be looked at with more eyes at AFD. -- Whpq (talk) 14:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've done some more research trying to substantiate the awards and have come to the conclusion they are unverifiable and likely not quite true or exaggerated.  As such, I've nominated the article for deletion at Articles for deletion/Ray Ruffin. -- Whpq (talk) 13:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Donald
Thanks for the save on Don Martin. Much appreciated. Seems rather ridiculous this BLP, but meh. Five Years 16:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Good evening, Your Goaliness. I learned something today...
... but it was not about Garrick Ibbotson. I learned that there is a Sicilian version of the Triskelion called the "trinacria". Which is all good and fine, but unfortunately it appears that I have not yet learned to check the references before adding tags. Oops! --Shirt58 (talk) 15:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and another thing. Why aren't you an WP:ADMIN yet?--Shirt58 (talk) 15:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No probs... not really convinced WAFL stats belong there at all, and the WAFL online ref had changed, so it prompted me to update that. As for the admin, I have no desire to try to prove myself to a bunch of people of have no idea who I am or what I know other than via a few keystrokes I do on here. I have read a bit of the RfA reform being discussed and might jump in at some stage - if they want to start handing it out to "worthy" candidates, I might accept it, but I'm busy enough at the moment. The-Pope (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If you do run I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd be delighted to nominate you, myself included.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  17:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Uri Kabiri
Hello, regarding what you said about Uri Kabiri, would you please educate me as to inserting sources into a Wikipedia page? I've tried to add his Facebook link, and it didn't look like the rest of the links. I still don't know how to add sources of reffs to a page either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viki333 (talk • contribs) 19:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

BLPs
Since April 2010 (can't believe it's that long) being unreferenced is indeed grounds for BLPs to be deleted. --Dweller (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No, you have not read it correctly. Only articles created after March 18, 2010 can be deleted because they are unreferenced. Those created before that date still need to go through the standard PROD or AfD procedure. This one was created in 2005. Feel free to take it to AfD, but I would think that a long running radio show guy would generally have enough coverage to meet the WP:GNG. The-Pope (talk) 15:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right - I mistakenly thought this was a new article, not sure why. Oh, I have no problems with this article at all now you referenced it! --Dweller (talk) 15:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia cleanup
I noticed you have been removing Category:Wikipedia cleanup from some 5+ categories now. Are you sure you are doing the right thing? Was this discussed somewhere? Debresser (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:DIFFUSE should apply to maintenence tags in my opinion. The cats are still in subcats of Category:Wikipedia cleanup. I stated this when I tried to identify which cleanup tags were in which category and found an appalling mess of 129 cleanup cats.  There are some nice "grouped" cats such as Category:Wikipedia articles with content issues that ideally we should group things into and not repeat them in the parent cats too. The-Pope (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Thanks for your reply. Debresser (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Why?
I made my edit in between yours, so, due to the resulting edit conflict, I copied my version over and saved. So either I didn't notice you had changed the tag, or I copied the old tag over by mistake. Either way, it wasn't intentional. Gran2 14:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No problems, thanks for the quick response. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 14:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Mike Fitzpatrick (broadcaster)
Hello the Pope, I'm the subject of Mike Fitzpatrick (broadcaster) and I'm wondering why my page continues to be edited an changed? There was nothing factually incorrect on it. 58.168.202.163 (talk) 06:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there, the main issues are that we have two key policies - verifiability and biographies of living people. Together they say that we shouldn't have unreferenced articles, especially for living people.  Being "factually correct" is our aim, but we must have reliable sources that preferably are independent of the article (ie, sorry but we can't just "trust you" - how can we be sure that you are who you claim to be and not a stalker or whatever).  We also have a conflict of interest policy that restricts what you should be editing on articles associated with you.  Read it and follow the guidelines shown and all should be OK.  If you really want more info added to your article, then finding reliable references to back it up is essential. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 06:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help - hopefully the sources that have been added are sufficient thanks again - i've read the discussion response.

Jimenez
Hi there, There is no need to notify me if you are going to prod an article I didn't really write. I created the page you prodded as a redirect to an article on a Spanish basketball player, not a Puerto Rican singer. Thanks--TM 11:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I normally check the article history for things like that - must have forgot and just clicked. The-Pope (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Jim Hunter (skier)
Hi,

Thanks for spotting my error at Jim Hunter (skier) on the Olympic bronze medal. I'd skimmed through some sources to get the basic bio down in my head. But I missed the fact that the 1972 Olympics in Sapporo was a combined Olympics and World Championship for alpine skiing but the combined alpine event was not an Olympic sport and the bronze was a World Championship medal earned in Sapporo. Cheers! -- Whpq (talk) 15:53, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Fast Forward (band)
Could you please check to see if there is enough support here to justify removal of the refimprove tag that you placed on the page. Many thanks in advance.

Dreadarthur (talk) 03:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Question moved from your userpage
I don't know if this is the right place to talk about this, I'm sorry if it's not but I don't know what to do. On Sept 27 my page about Italian actress Cristina Serafini was erased, saying that it was copied by her imdb page, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2866606/bio Well it's not!! I had written her wikipedia page months ago, and Serafini's agent copied the biography from Wikipedia on Serafini's imdb page! Can I please have my page back??!!?? It's my copyright! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masscapp (talk • contribs) Moved to your talk page by Jenks24 (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Donald Sanborn
Hello The-Pope. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Donald Sanborn, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The content copied has a copyright date on the website of 2007 - the text here which is alleged to have been copied was created in 2005, so this does not appear to be a copyright violation. Thank you. Phantom Steve /<font color="#008000">talk &#124;<font color="#000080">contribs \ 22:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The wayback machine shows that it existed elsewhere months before it was created here. The-Pope (talk) 00:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Good catch! I have now deleted it, as you were correct to nominate it for speedy deletion! Thanks <font color="#307D7E">Phantom <font color="#55CAFA">Steve /<font color="#008000">talk &#124;<font color="#000080">contribs \ 02:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Nikthestoned's talk page. --15:29, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The article that won't die
Apologies for the delayed response.

It looks like that's been confirmed as a toolserver bug, meaning that my contacts won't do us much good. However, I'll give Wikimedia-Deutschland a call and see if Daniel can come up with any great ideas. Thanks for following up. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I know it is probably priority ultra low compared to most other bugs, but it's mildly annoying! The-Pope (talk) 03:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Redirecting School Articles
G'day,

When you're redirecting school articles, could you please create adequate content in the locality page such that we don't have a net result of a loss of information? i.e., diff. At the moment, if someone searches for Ardtornish Primary, then they are redirected to a page with absolutely no information regarding the school.

This has been discussed extensively at WPSCH, most recently in the discussion at WT:WPSCH. Cheers. <span style="font: Tahoma, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 8pt;">&tilde;danjel [ talk | contribs ] 22:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Jaspreet singh architect (deletion)
Dear The pope, thanks for putting together few nice words regarding the deletion of jaspreet singh architect - the first article created by me.I fully understand t6he reasons and only because of your nice ending words put together are holding me back on the wikipedia and I will definetly continue and would like to help expanding other stubs .I also understand that if I find other reliable sources regarding my first article i can collect them all and later I can request for undeletion. I appreciate all of yours efforts on making this a great encyclopedia.--Gibbletow 23:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibbletow (talk • contribs) Also The Pope, I have found many other articles ( biographies of living persons)dont have the independent references , but they are still there and not even nominated for deletion .I need your help , Would you be able to guide me if in future I needed help. also Check this Latest news coverage for Jaspreet singh http://sikhchic.com/article-detail.php?cat=14&id=2867 .Kind regards --Gibbletow 05:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibbletow (talk • contribs)

Cleanup drive
Would it possible to add November 2006 articles that have a cleanup tag to the top of this page while removing the completed articles from October. This way we can move on. I can't find any reliable source for Failford, New South Wales or Glenelg Highway, Waverley/Melbourne Reds top 10 statistics will probably be deleted and I will merge Dennis Creek (South Australia) soon. - Shiftchange (talk) 09:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Those bowling wicketkeepers
Thanks for this. That'll teach me for just assuming that there was no way a wicketkeeper could have the best average on both Ashes tours! Jenks24 (talk) 00:16, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Pope's power
I wish to congratulate you. You have the power to destroy my life and my family. Your fastidious devotion to the awesome and irrepressible dissemination of information by the media has contributed to making my life a living hell at the moment. Just as Popes in the past excommunicated individuals from society, turned them into pariahs no one would touch, social lepers that would be unable to find shelter or assistance, you, sir, have a similar self-appointed power. I have pleaded elsewhere for all references to my life to be removed from your site but my pleas fall on deaf ears. I guess my accomplishments as well as my utter failure as a human being must all be put on the same level. I can't say I envy you your job. I do hope the malicious things you verify don't keep you from a good night's rest. I would think your conscience should not bother you, since you are the Pope, infallible and inviolate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.200.127 (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I'd say that your actions/interactions/relationship with others has contributed to making your life what it is. Please read (or get your lawyer to read) WP:COI, WP:AUTOBIO and WP:OTRS and follow the guidelines listed there if you wish to make changes.  And BTW, you are welcome that I removed abuse and defamation about you and instead replaced it with a neutral reporting of the news from two newspapers.  Have you sent a similar message to the newspapers that reported the news first? Regards, The-Pope (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sierra McCormick
Went ahead and moved it. It's being recreated so frequently by obsessed fans that I'm tired of making sure it's G4'd, and the show at least makes her notability borderline so no reason to keep deleting it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

"no one beats Chuck Norris"
Love it :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Fairfield Industrial Dog Object
Hello, Bloody Google Hits, how many times do we have to explain?? I do disagree with you on this one as it is just a wooden doggy but I didn't quote Bloody Google Hits. All the best for the upcoming Season. Cheers Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:35, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Golly, golly gumdrops. Bunyip Bluegum58 (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Joel McDonald


A tag has been placed on Joel McDonald, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. The-Pope (talk) 23:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Appropriate disambiguator for Peter Stephens (footballer born 1950)
I note you reverted my bold page move. From my perspective that's fine and in line with normal Wikipedia editing practices. However I'm not convinced your preference of disambiguator is correct. I've opened a discussion at Talk:Peter Stephens (footballer born 1950) and I would be grateful if you would contribute. Thank you --MegaSloth (talk) 20:32, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Actually it's the other fellow that's making the huge issue out of it (and another IP, which is why I got involved to begin with). All I'm doing is trying to get him to provide all the evidence that's needed per what you said about reliable sources. When there's a clash, more is needed but he just refused to listen. I tried to explain it to him, but it was like it was in one ear and out the other. In the end I admit to getting flustered (leading to the remark that you criticised and I'll take that on board) but what can you do? Because it's a specified area like you said I'm not so sure 3O would have really helped. The NFL is a rather notable comp - largely because of it's considerable history of ex-VFL players playing and coaching (most of the local comps have that) and the controversial manner in which the name changed from Diamond Valley to Northern (unique in the game I believe). Anyway, I have it in hand now. The IP was blocked for a week and I'm just waiting for the SPI to be completed on the other contributor. Footy Freak7 (talk) 11:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi ThePope. Thank you to contribs at my stubs page, Gendut Doni Christiawan. SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 07:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Arnott
Sorry, I messed up my Arnotts! I hope I've sorted it out now.Castlemate (talk) 21:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Revertion
Hello. I see that you have deleted my speedy delete request. In the page, it does not say anywhere that he played in the world cup, so I have no choice but to file this page as being about an unimportant person. Thank you.

Sean Kelly (Scottish footballer)
Hey Pope, Kelly does play for Scottish First Division side Ayr United however he has not played for them this season. His only appearance came for them last year when they were in the Scottish Second Division which means he is not notable so would you please reconsider re-adding the PROD so I don't have to AfD it, Regards. &#9733;&#9734; <font color="Fuchsia">DUCK IS <font color="Fuchsia">JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 16:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Now at AfD Articles for deletion/Sean Kelly (Scottish footballer) &#9733;&#9734; <font color="Fuchsia">DUCK IS <font color="Fuchsia">JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 21:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)