User talk:TheWeakWilled/Archive2

Five Peaks Challenge
I can't see how you've arrived at a "clear consensus" for merging this article. There is no such consensus at all. Five nominations for merge, four for delete and 5.5 for keep (week keep = 0.5). I've counted "Merge or Delete" as one merge and one delete - it gets too complicated to look at it any other way. Anyway, there is no consensus to do anything with this article, it's simply too close to call, so it should have been left alone. Can you explain your rationale? Mister Flash (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Weighing the arguments, I saw that there were a couple of sources that had information about the race, but barely to pass notability. Looking at it again, I'll change the consensus to "no consensus."  The article will be kept, but I'd suggest a continued discussion on the talk page of the article.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 18:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think that's the right decision for the moment, but as you say, I wouldn't be surprised if the debate restarts again. Mister Flash (talk) 20:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

relisting AFDs multiple times
Hi TWW, I saw your relist of Articles for deletion/The Mathematicians. Note WP:RELIST says, in bold, "no debate may be relisted more than twice". I didn't konw if you were aware of this upper limit on relisting, so I wanted to drop you a line. There is also a conversation about this at Administrators' noticeboard. tedder (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I might have done that to another debate a well. As for ANI, I'll voice my opinion there. I personally am against relisting debates, as if a PROD is challenged (turns into an AFD), and the challenger hasn't proved notability in a week, it should just be treated like the PROD wasn't even challenged. If there was no PROD, AFD is just like a PROD, but lasts up to 3 weeks, which is 2 weeks longer than just PRODding!  Thanks, and I'll follow that rule from now on.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 15:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. It's just something I've noticed happening recently, as I look through a datesorted list of AFDs to see which ones haven't been cleaned up. tedder (talk) 19:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Notability?
Hi,

I've recently learned about all that mess around qutIM deletion and read the whole "to deletion" discussion. It's OK you're asking for a proof of notability. But could you please proof notability of, let's say, Burning_Cats_and_Amputees. Let's face the truth: you personally have no idea about what's qitIM is, and I don't have a single idea what the hell are Bullet Boys and their "greatest hits" album. Why should I trust YOUR opinion about that band? Or maybe I should start deletion procedure of that article (and most of articles you created about metal bands)? Just check your article about Automatic_7. All the links that should proof notability (you seem to be particulary keen on it, aren't you?) just go to some e-zines which I've never heard about. The situation is even worse that the one with qutIM when you didn't accept publication at nokia.com as a valid proof: Nokia is much more well-known "brand" than some "punkbands.com" or "Wolfgang's Vault".

Sorry for your time. In case you'd like to continue discussion please contact me via e-mail epicur@tut dot by

194.197.79.18 (talk) 09:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC) leave
 * Burning_Cats_and_Amputees is notable because it is an album by a notable band (see WP:NALBUMS), if you need sources to prove that BulletBoys is notable, go to blabbermouth.net or google news. Automatic 7 is notable because it has substantial coverage in reliable third party sources, as outlined by the references.  Wolfgang's Valut is a well known site by bootleggers, and lovers of live music.  The "valut" has been around for 30+ years, and is very notable.  As for me and my metal bands, I can assure you that I have no conflict of interest or WP:ILIKEIT (in fact the only article that I have created in which I listen to the music of is Be'lakor).  Feel free to nominate any of these articles for deletion however.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 00:24, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you & a question
Hey, thanks for helping me with my article! I was wondering, could you make the edits? I'm a bit confused. The article is Derek Murawski. Thanks much!

Iongatherer (talk) 15:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mahan Korakkar Siddhar Jeeva Samathi
Hello TheWeakWilled, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Mahan Korakkar Siddhar Jeeva Samathi - a page you tagged - because: '''I *think* this article is about a place, not a person. Needs to go to AfD I think, needs more eyes on it. .''' Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Ged UK  17:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ignore that. I need to look at that again. I'm still not totally sure what it's about, which could be a reason to delete in itself. Ged  UK  17:28, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks reverted
Articles for deletion/Manon Batiste (2nd nomination)

FYI. Ikip 20:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Should I bring it to AN/I? At the least they are being less than civil.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * A related thread is already at ANI. Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * By me; they were not personal attacks. You yourself called them borderline and a reasonable read of what you redacted will show them to easily be on the civil side of "teh borderline". Hi, Ikip ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Jack.
 * Unfortunately no surprise we are here again. Ignoring the behavior of the elephant(s) in the room, A Nobody overreacted again with the ANI. Once again DGG's comments about all this is spot on, as most of his comments are, A Nobody is overly sensitive to this behavior, which makes him an easy target.
 * A Nobody should have come to me and ask my advice before opening the ANI.
 * Before Christmas day this will blow up. For example, we still have yet to hear from Protonk, Lar, and Pablo. Make sure to email them, if you haven't already... *Sigh*
 * The next step with EEMIV is Wiketiquette if EEMIV continues to attack other editors,  Requests for comment/EEMIV.
 * I think the NPA here is borderline (he is not telling editors to fuck off, or that his edits are shit) EEMIV is a smart editor, so maybe this conversation will convince him to bite his tongue a little more. No need to do anything now.
 * Ikip 20:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect this isn't the first (or last) conflict between all of you?  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Good guess. Merry Christmas, Jack Merridew 20:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I notified EEMIV and A Nobody about this thread. Maybe we can move the personal comments about each other here? Or to the talk page of the AFD? What do you think people?
 * Weakwilled, I wish it was the last, it is not the first though. The recent arbcom and the A Nobody's RFC is the latest. Ikip 20:45, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Obama_assassination_scares&action=historysubmit&diff=334197314&oldid=334197197

What do you think about this article. A few people are aggressively trying to kill it by redirecting it and do not want to have a merge discussion. Maybe discuss it on the talk page of the above link? JB50000 (talk) 04:12, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not merge all of the scares into one big article? Why is it back to being a disambiguation page?   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 13:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Do you want to stop this blanking the page/redirect and help write the article? JB50000 (talk) 06:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If consensus is to redirect, I will follow consensus.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 13:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to bring to TheWeakWilled's attention the new "Barack Obama assassination threats" page I've proposed.. I've reached out to JB50000 on this, and I think this compromise is in keeping with some of the discussion developing at the Hawaii AFD, and is a far better solution than the AFD attempts and non-consensus merge attempts we've seen surrounding the Denver and Tennessee articles in recent days. I think JB50000 had the right idea all along, but I think the way he had gone about it was perhaps not ideal. I'm hoping this compromise will satisfy everybody, but any input TheWeakWilled can provide I would highly appreciate. —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  16:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Highly Support inclusion of above article. It brings all of the articles together into one article.  If the individual pages get deleted, they can be merged into your page.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 17:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm going to wait to hear from JB50000 before I move it out of the userspace, but I appreciate your feedback very much! —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  17:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Joachim Cronman
An article that you have been involved in editing, Joachim Cronman, 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. Gerbelzodude99 (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

thx
Thx Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 16:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

AFD and CSD of Emanate
Hello, The Weak Willed. On your AFD nomination of Emanate, you mentioned there was no CSD criteria for the article. I can tell you that A7 (the notability issue) and A5 (the dictionary issue) both look reasonable to me. Because of this I tagged the article for both of these criteria. I just thought I would let you know about this. You can also put this guide in your userspace to help (it helps me a lot!)  smithers  -  talk  -  sign!  16:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I was just about to reply in the afd (saw it was deleted so naced it) and saw this. Ah yes, I just read the first line of A5, and if I looked at the second it would have fit.  Next time I should just read!  Thanks, and I will add the template to my userspace!   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 16:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob!  smithers  - talk  -  sign!  16:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

&eta;oian  &Dagger;orever &eta;ew &Dagger;rontiers  22:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! - Vipin Hari  ||  talk  03:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

RE:The super speedy deletion...er
What can I say, you and I are both watchful Wikipedians! Cheers, SGGH ping! 21:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL!
Well, all the "article" claimed was that the subject was the coolest person in the world. Without verifiable third-party references, this is a shallow claim at best :) Seriously, I just couldn't resist after having deleted who knows how many "I am the coolest" nanostubs over the years. Glad I brightened your day a bit!  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

FAC
Thank you for your comment at Featured article candidates/Marriott School of Management/archive2. I have addressed your concern and would invite your further participation in this FAC. —Eustress talk 19:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Kot Najeebullah
How was this an uncontested prod? Pahari Sahib  19:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I was referring to treat it as an uncontested prod, not that a prod was uncontested.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 19:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And why is that? Pahari Sahib   20:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Because nobody opposed to the afd, or put in a keep !vote.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Despite the fact I said "This is obviously a redirect/merge, because the Kot Najeebullah article actually has a source (and a Government one at that also being an administrative subdivision) - compared to the other one which doesn't.... to argue for the deletion of an article on the above grounds is absurd". Does that not count as a keep, could you at least restore the contents to User:Pahari Sahib/Kot Najeebullah for the time being. Pahari Sahib   20:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess one could consider it a keep !vote, next time it would be easier to bold when you make a vote. It also helps the closing admin when looking at the discussion.  I cannot, since I don't have sysop privileges, but you can ask the closing admin to userfy it.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like I mixed you up with Cirt a little :-) Pahari Sahib   20:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

✅, at User:Pahari Sahib/Kot Najeebullah. Cirt (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Response
I'd like you to even though I don't know what my chances would be. Joe Chill (talk) 21:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it ready? Joe Chill (talk) 22:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind. Evidently is. Joe Chill (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

FAC comments
Thanks for your comments at Featured article candidates/July 2009 Ürümqi riots/archive1 (and sorry I forgot to check those standard things before posting the nom). I believe I have addressed all the issues. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 21:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!!!
Thanks for that vandal reversion on my user page buddy!!! :) arun  talk  11:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

AFD
Hello. Can you please explain to me the articles for deletion process or point me to somewhere that explains it. Can anybody simply remove my 'delete' tag like you just did or only an administrator? If I 'bring it up at afd' do I put the delete tag back? etc. I don't know how this works. Thanks. DegenFarang (talk) 16:08, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Anybody can contest a speedy deletion tag. Your argument for deletion would have been more suited at AFD since the person claims to be notable (as a professional poker player).  You can look at WP:AFDHOWTO on how to list it, or if you want I can list it on your behalf.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 16:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * By 'contest' you mean anybody can remove a 'speedy delete' tag? Also I think I did everything correctly in nominating that article, please fix any errors if I did not. Steve Badger. Thanks for your help. DegenFarang (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, anybody can remove a speedy deletion tag. The AFD looks good, except I don't see it on today's discussion through my quick look. I'll take a better look and add it if it isn't there.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 16:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hoppenheim redirect
Is it just a case of me applying the wrong tag or should talk pages of redirected pages which only have project templates be retained permanently? I wasn't sure. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd contact the project to see if they still want it on there. From what I've seen, most do. The talk pages of redirects (especially high traffic ones like Obama) are usually used to discuss where the redirect should go, or if there should be an article there. In addition, I don't think the tag was correct, since the page did exist, just as a redirect. I'm not 100% sure on it either, but I don't think the talk page would be deleted.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 16:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Aof
Hello TheWeakWilled! I want to thank you for joining the Korn Project. Our current Article of Focus is Neidermeyer's Mind. I would appreciate everyone in the project to contribute as much as they can to the article. It would be awesome if we could raise the article up to GA. But remember, most information you publish must include reliable scources. If you don't know how to recognize a reliable scource, see WP:RS. Crowz RSA  23:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the welcome, however I highly doubt that Neidermeyer's Mind will be able to be anything but C Class at the highest. Currently there are 2 (at the most) reliable sources cited in the article, and there aren't an abundance of sources out there.  I have read Got the Life and there isn't much in the book about the demo, nor do I remember Fieldy mentioning the demo by name.  Maybe Head's book has something in it?   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 23:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have the book?
 * Yes.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 00:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's awesome man. I found the album scanned at . That might help a little, especially with production

New Aof
Do to lack of information available, the Aof has been changed, and is currently Life is Peachy. Crowz RSA  02:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

TFD closing instructions
Per your [ edit here], you should probably read Templates_for_discussion/Administrator_instructions. The subsection headings go above the closing div tags. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, weird. At AFD the section goes below.  Thanks for telling me, now I know.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 21:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You are correct. TFD doesn't use individual pages for each nomination either, which is part of the reason for the difference. Thanks. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Relisting
I really wasn't sure if it would have been appropriate, and I didn't know about the "relisting rule" lol :) thanks!  D u s t i SPEAK!! 23:39, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Force Fed Lies
Why did you delete this article? It is notable because it's Dirge Within first album, there is a Wikipedia page on them, so why not their first studio album? Ben 22:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The article isn't deleted yet, and there is no article on Dirge Within.  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 22:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL
This had me in stitches, haha. Best edit summary yet! • GunMetal Angel  06:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah dude, you gotta watchlist that page. It seemed like after I sourced the genre as deathcore by eighth reliable sources, they stopped reverting the genre. This almost had me crying in laughter.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 15:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you x2
The barnstar and your well wishes are very much appreciated, thank you. Rock on J04n(talk page) 23:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks you for taking the time to check the alt text and links for the Takalik Abaj FA nom. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 10:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help
Thanks for your help on keeping the Chris Arrowsmith article from deletion. Chris (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: Speedy Deletion Nomination of Eyes of the Oracle and Rooms of Anguish
Thanks for putting it through speedy deletion. That was a suitable solution. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 19:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

My edit to The Acacia Strain
Hey,

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner regarding my edit. My primary concern was with the seemingly excessive number of external links (under the citations section) for a comparatively small article. Also, I'm from Chicopee and was only vaguely familiar with the band, so that biased me further towards the belief that this was a page created mainly by the band or close friends of the band and that they lacked suitable notability. Even with the notability aspect ignored, the sheer number of external links just looked like like spam... and with the article containing minimal content, I thought deletion may have been warranted.

No worries, though -- I'm happy to defer to others with more genre-specific knowledge.

Cheers, Monolith2 (talk) 17:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The band has one former member (Jeanne Sagan) which is notable, and the band has a few hits on google news http://news.google.com/news?q=the_acacia_strain. They aren't very popular, but are also signed to a major label.  I actually added the excessive amount of links, as some people weren't convinced that their genre was deathcore.  I could probably remove most of them. Thanks,   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 18:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The snowball clause
Humorously enough the AfD nomination of 2010 Austin plane crash was speedily kept per WP:SNOW before I had time to post the reply to your question of how that guideline applies, but for your amusement I will post what I wrote here:
 * Sure. The article is going to be kept with a landslide majority, so instead of wasting a lot of time we should wrap it up now. This is exactly the type of nominations for which the snowball clause applies. I'm not usually one for name-calling, but how asinine can otherwise intelligent people (certainly intelligent enough to edit an encyclopedia) get when they treat an incident where the US president was briefed, the Department of Homeland Security scrambled two jet fighters, the perpetrator is being called a domestic terrorist by a Congressman and Facebook takes down several pages which express support for the guy, that in itself causing several newspaper headlines, when they treat that as if it isn't notable?

__meco (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not very familiar with the notability guidelines when it comes to plane crashes, but now I can see that this incident exceeds those requirements. Sorry about that.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 15:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Osarius That's me! : Naggin' again? : What did I do?! 16:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate warnings
Despite not being an administrator you responded to a thread at the administrators noticeboard by leaving messages on on the talkpages of two ip accounts, 119.154.44.87 and 119.154.2.165. Your message reads 'it has been seen that your recent edits are violating the Wikipedia policy of keeping a neutral point of view on articles' however you do not provide any indication of which edits you believe violate policy, nor do you elaborate on just who has seen these alleged violations. As such your warnings serve no purpose. Accusations of improper editing should be accompanied by appropriate evidence. A quick look at User_talk:119.154.2.165 shows that this editor has received previous warnings from other editors - each of which were accompanied by a link to the articles in dispute. Your words stand out as lacking that courtesy. Please consider more carefully your approach should you decide to issue warnings in the future as commentary on editor behaviour without appropriate evidence could be seen as disruption. Regards. Weakopedia (talk) 08:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe any editor can assist others on ANI, as most look for uninvolved third parties. True, I didn't provide a diff, but it should be obvious which edits I was referring to.  Any plain editor could have seen that the IP was disrupting the article by adding OR and not citing reliable sources.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I am sure that anyone can respond at ANI, I didn't mean to suggest otherwise, it is acting upon an ANI section without adequate referencing that worries me. You left a warning without any references. If you believed that from other warnings on their talkpages that the editors in question knew what you were talking about then your warning was redundant as they already knew from the other warnings. Making a generalised comment about user behaviour is strongly discouraged. You are required at all times to include adequate reasoning for your actions. Remember that the warning system is highly refined and is provided by the community. It is your responsibility to justify issuance of warnings to any user. All statements must be verifiable here or they are subject to removal. If you involve yourself in warning other editors you must provide adequate references to the specific behaviour you are warning about. If you think the editor in question already knows what you are talking about the question you should ask of yourself is 'Is my warning adding to this editors appreciation of the situation'. In this case I would suggest that your warnings were redundant as they simply reinforced earlier warnings from other editors without adding any references to point to specific behaviour. Participation at ANI is encouraged however we all need to be thorough of our use of the warning system. Remember that not everyone fully appreciates how the rules work here so what may seem an obvious infraction to you another editor may believe to be acceptable. This is why providing diffs is essential for the person you are warning and also for the rest of the community who may evaluate your actions. Regards. Weakopedia (talk) 10:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject iPhone OS
This was a one-time notice from WikiProject iPhone OS · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Feature Portal Review of Portal:iPhone OS
IPhone OS has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. This was a courtesy notice from WikiProject iPhone OS · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

July 2009 Ürümqi riots is at FAC
Hi, TheWeakWilled. You commented at a previous FAC for this article, so I just wanted to let you know that it is at FAC again (here) if you are interested in commenting again. Thanks, r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 15:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:X-christmas.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:X-christmas.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Long time, no talk
LOL • GunMetal Angel  09:02, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Dude, don't even say that, WoP is freaking amazing. In other news I made the best edit summary in history here xD. Oh and about reviews, read up on it here. Hope to get a reply from you soon, bro. • GunMetal Angel  02:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Rotten Records albums
Category:Rotten Records albums, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

VPC
— raeky  T  10:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)