User talk:The Bushranger/Archive17

Barnstar

 * Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 00:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter
Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:
 * was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
 * was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
 * was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
 * was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
 * was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:


 * was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
 * has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
 * claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of, who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Nominee for funniest named article of the month
Check out Untited Tour Can't someone be patient(and spell correctly) and wait till something has a name before creating an article about it?...William 01:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * To paraphase Doc Brown: Great Tits! - The Bushranger One ping only 01:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Prod question
Anchalee Voogd was proded in November 2009. The prod was up for over a month but the article was never deleted. An editor did take down the prod. This can't be deleted without an AFD now, can it? The article was originally a vanity page that's been edited down....William 02:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not 100% sure on the policy regarding "missed PRODs". Since it was removed (albiet late), it should probably go through a full AfD, yeah. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fairchild BQ-3
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fleetwings BQ-2
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fleetwings BQ-1
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for warning the user who does not accept my good faith. It is -I think- the first time some admin has noticed this behaviour. However, the same user only today accused me of "bad faith" twice in a short while; here: Articles for deletion/Sarkis Torosyan. I hate to report a user for this kind of behaviour (I believe none of us are kids) but I think in this case it might be necessary to do so. I am afraid time has come for something beyond warnings for the said user. A short rest could help them relax and come back with new energy to write articles, instead of constantly breaching WP:NPA. --E4024 (talk) 01:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ouch...yeah, that's not of the good, at all. If he does it again he should probably go to WP:AN/I... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

:File:Texaco13.jpg

 * File:Texaco13.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) – uploaded by Bzuk ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

While this is a great image, it's unfortunately released under a CC-BY-NC-SA license, which is not compatible with Wikipedia's licensing. The Bushranger One ping only 02:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Likely just an error in assigning it a classification; the photographer gave full rights to use the image. I don't know how to change the licensing to reflect that there is no problem in its use. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 06:27, 31 January 2013 (UTC).
 * Well, do you have the original email or document that granted the full rights? A WP:OTRS submission would clear everything up. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The original email was sent in a few years ago, and was probably stored on a computer that I now no longer own. I'll see if I can contact the photographer again but he was undergoing some serious medical issues and this may not be the most opportune time to get in touch. I did copy from the original note from him and used it as part of the rationale statement for the image, but obviously made a mistake in giving it a classification; I recall in our email exchange that as this was one of the first times I had used an outside image, that I was unsure how to make the request for its use but he did assure me that I could use the Flickr image in any way I needed. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 06:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC).


 * Ouch. Well, the main problem is that it's marked "noncommercial use only" both here and on his website - the NC part of the CC license isn't allowed by Wikipedia. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Worse news, in searching his site, I can only find information dating back to 2007. I can try to find any old computer hard drives where information was stored; there may be a copy of old emails on an elderly EMac that I used as a desktop machine at home, but it stubbornly refuses to launch the mail program to look at past messages. This cranky machine has had problems in running older apps. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 07:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC).
 * That's a shame. . Hopefully it'll work, that's a great pic. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Check out this image  as a replacement. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC).
 * That would be great, except it's CC-BY-ND - another no-no. Only CC-BY and CC-BY-SA (and PD of course) are acceptable free licenses. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I did take a photo of the museum exhibit on my last visit to Chicago, now, where did I put it?!? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

The original photographer, Brett Daniel, passed away on December 5, 2010. Bzuk
 * That's a shame indeed. . - The Bushranger One ping only 19:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

How about this? Email sent to me February 1, 2013:

Hi, Just to confirm, you can use any of my aviation photos on Wikipedia, thanks for asking.-MrTinDC (Anthony Nigrelli)
 * Would you consent to signing a waiver to release your photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_t_in_dc/3917272935/) for use on Wikipedia?
 * No problem, I’ve electronically checked in the appropriate places, signed, and dated so you can use it. I definitely took the photo in person, and it’s 100% my creation and you may use it as you wish. Good luck with your Wikipedia articles. Best,Anthony

................................................................. Creative Commons (CC0) Waiver

Your name: Anthony Nigrelli Your URL: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_t_in_dc/3917272935/ Title of work: MSI Mystery Ship Location: United States

Creative Commons Legal Code CC0 1.0 Universal

CREATIVE COMMONS CORPORATION IS NOT A LAW FIRM AND DOES NOT PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES. DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP. CREATIVE COMMONS PROVIDES THIS INFORMATION ON AN "AS-IS" BASIS. CREATIVE COMMONS MAKES NO WARRANTIES REGARDING THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR THE INFORMATION OR WORKS PROVIDED HEREUNDER, AND DISCLAIMS LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR THE INFORMATION OR WORKS PROVIDED HEREUNDER.

Statement of Purpose

The laws of most jurisdictions throughout the world automatically confer exclusive Copyright and Related Rights (defined below) upon the creator and subsequent owner(s) (each and all, an "owner") of an original work of authorship and/or a database (each, a "Work").

Certain owners wish to permanently relinquish those rights to a Work for the purpose of contributing to a commons of creative, cultural and scientific works ("Commons") that the public can reliably and without fear of later claims of infringement build upon, modify, incorporate in other works, reuse and redistribute as freely as possible in any form whatsoever and for any purposes, including without limitation commercial purposes. These owners may contribute to the Commons to promote the ideal of a free culture and the further production of creative, cultural and scientific works, or to gain reputation or greater distribution for their Work in part through the use and efforts of others.

For these and/or other purposes and motivations, and without any expectation of additional consideration or compensation, the person associating CC0 with a Work (the "Affirmer"), to the extent that he or she is an owner of Copyright and Related Rights in the Work, voluntarily elects to apply CC0 to the Work and publicly distribute the Work under its terms, with knowledge of his or her Copyright and Related Rights in the Work and the meaning and intended legal effect of CC0 on those rights.

1. Copyright and Related Rights. A Work made available under CC0 may be protected by copyright and related or neighboring rights ("Copyright and Related Rights"). Copyright and Related Rights include, but are not limited to, the following:

i. the right to reproduce, adapt, distribute, perform, display, communicate, and translate a Work; ii. moral rights retained by the original author(s) and/or performer(s); iii. publicity and privacy rights pertaining to a person's image or likeness depicted in a Work; iv. rights protecting against unfair competition in regards to a Work, subject to the limitations in paragraph 4(a), below; v. rights protecting the extraction, dissemination, use and reuse of data in a Work; vi. database rights (such as those arising under Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, and under any national implementation thereof, including any amended or successor version of such directive); and vii. other similar, equivalent or corresponding rights throughout the world based on applicable law or treaty, and any national implementations thereof.

2. Waiver. To the greatest extent permitted by, but not in contravention of, applicable law, Affirmer hereby overtly, fully, permanently, irrevocably and unconditionally waives, abandons, and surrenders all of Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights and associated claims and causes of action, whether now known or unknown (including existing as well as future claims and causes of action), in the Work (i) in all territories worldwide, (ii) for the maximum duration provided by applicable law or treaty (including future time extensions), (iii) in any current or future medium and for any number of copies, and (iv) for any purpose whatsoever, including without limitation commercial, advertising or promotional purposes (the "Waiver"). Affirmer makes the Waiver for the benefit of each member of the public at large and to the detriment of Affirmer's heirs and successors, fully intending that such Waiver shall not be subject to revocation, rescission, cancellation, termination, or any other legal or equitable action to disrupt the quiet enjoyment of the Work by the public as contemplated by Affirmer's express Statement of Purpose.

3. Public License Fallback. Should any part of the Waiver for any reason be judged legally invalid or ineffective under applicable law, then the Waiver shall be preserved to the maximum extent permitted taking into account Affirmer's express Statement of Purpose. In addition, to the extent the Waiver is so judged Affirmer hereby grants to each affected person a royalty-free, non transferable, non sublicensable, non exclusive, irrevocable and unconditional license to exercise Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights in the Work (i) in all territories worldwide, (ii) for the maximum duration provided by applicable law or treaty (including future time extensions), (iii) in any current or future medium and for any number of copies, and (iv) for any purpose whatsoever, including without limitation commercial, advertising or promotional purposes (the "License"). The License shall be deemed effective as of the date CC0 was applied by Affirmer to the Work. Should any part of the License for any reason be judged legally invalid or ineffective under applicable law, such partial invalidity or ineffectiveness shall not invalidate the remainder of the License, and in such case Affirmer hereby affirms that he or she will not (i) exercise any of his or her remaining Copyright and Related Rights in the Work or (ii) assert any associated claims and causes of action with respect to the Work, in either case contrary to Affirmer's express Statement of Purpose.

4. Limitations and Disclaimers. a. No trademark or patent rights held by Affirmer are waived, abandoned, surrendered, licensed or otherwise affected by this document.

b. Affirmer offers the Work as-is and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Work, express, implied, statutory or otherwise, including without limitation warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non infringement, or the absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the present or absence of errors, whether or not discoverable, all to the greatest extent permissible under applicable law.

c. Affirmer disclaims responsibility for clearing rights of other persons that may apply to the Work or any use thereof, including without limitation any person's Copyright and Related Rights in the Work. Further, Affirmer disclaims responsibility for obtaining any necessary consents, permissions or other rights required for any use of the Work.

d. Affirmer understands and acknowledges that Creative Commons is not a party to this document and has no duty or obligation with respect to this CC0 or use of the Work.

__X_ I have read and understand the terms and intended legal effect of CC0, and hereby voluntarily elect to apply it to this work.

__X_ I hereby waive all copyright and related or neighboring rights together with all associated claims and causes of action with respect to this work to the extent possible under the law.

In particular, if you are an artist or author who depends upon copyright for your income, Creative Commons does not recommend that you use this tool.

If you don't own the rights to this work, then do not use CC0. If you believe that nobody owns rights to the work, then the Public Domain Mark may be what you're looking for.

Signed: __Anthony Nigrelli___(Anthony Nigrelli)

Dated: __February 1, 2013___(e.g. January 31, 2013)

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC).
 * That should work exactly perfectly, since it explicitly says cc-zero applies to the photo(s) in question. Forwarding that to WP:OTRS to confirm it would wrap things up. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I thought I would send an email to OTRS, but can't find the way to do that. I did send an email to ; is that the way to go? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC).
 * I'm not sure; it might be? I think the OTRS email is . - The Bushranger One ping only 23:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of gendered pronouns...
Can you check the discussion I had with myself at Talk:Botik of Peter the Great and make sure my logic is sound? Ryan Vesey 07:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "It" looks about right. I'm pretty sure that traditionally Russian vessels are masculine, however "it" always works - The Bushranger One ping only 07:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Dustin Jacoby deletion review
Per WP:DELREVD, I wanted let you know I'm planning to put up a deletion review on Dustin Jacoby, whose AfD you closed. Since then, Jacoby won the Glory World Series Light Heavyweight tournament, therefore passing WP:Kickboxing as a fighter who has won a "a national, continental, intercontinental or world championship from a major kickboxing organization." Before doing so, I was hoping you would overturn your original decision on the grounds that under WP:DRVPURPOSE "significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page." Thank you for your time. Luchuslu (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Well, it appears he might very well be notable indeed now. I think that unilaterally undeleting an article that had this degree of participation at AfD might be frowned upon, though - the WP:DRVPURPOSE note there is listed as a reason to send the article to DRV, as opposed to a WP:REFUND. So what I've done is restored the original article and moved it to your userspace at User:Luchuslu/Dustin Jacoby; that way you can expand the article with the new information and clean it up so that it demonstrates his notability, and once that's done you can send it to DRV and I'll support an undeletion as "now notable". - The Bushranger One ping only 23:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for your help. Luchuslu (talk) 14:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

articles created by sock
Hello. I am Starship9000. I noticed that there is a article that were created by a sockpuppet of a blocked user. The the article is Hebridean Air Services and it were created by that sockpuppet so is there anything you should do? If you propose it for deletion, tell the sockpuppet! Good luck!--Starship9000 (talk) 16:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As the article has been around for quite awhile and has been edited extensively by others, deletion per G5 isn't an option. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

RAN
God damn it, somebody closed the Norton thread at ANI. This is WAY not done there. Any way you could reopen that until I make my lengthy pitch? See RAN's talk page for broad details. Carrite (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, never mind, you're involved. I'm off. Carrite (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Alas, indeed. To my eternal frustration. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archimedean–Galileo spiral
Hello. While I obviously agree with the decision to close this as Delete, I felt your comment "defeated by spiral power" was not helpful to the author of the article, who is clearly well-meaning but does not understand what Wikipedia is. Do you think their understanding will be improved by that comment? Deltahedron (talk) 07:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I occasionally make humourous comments with regard to deletion outcomes when there's an obvious element of humour possible - for example, stating that Beardcore was "shaved". It's rare, and I make a point whenever I do it now to include "Delte" in the commentary. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:36, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you think that as a result the author of the article will now know why the article was deleted and how to contribute more effectively to the encyclopaedia in future? Deltahedron (talk) 07:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you think a simple statement of delete (without any commentary) would make any difference? Because that would be the alternative. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Alternatives would have been "Delete per arguments of X,Y,Z" or "Delete as unsupported by independent reliable sources" or "Delete as Wikipedia is not a journal for original research" or "Delete as not notable" or ...  Deltahedron (talk) 07:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * When there is a clear consensus for delete, I don't provide commentary on the closure, instead allowing the arguments of the !voters to explain things. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Dustin Jacoby
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Dustin Jacoby. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Luchuslu (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks; I'll take a look when I get a chance. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:58, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Dan Sileo
Could you also put this article on 6 months of semi-protection?--v/r - TP 19:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Hopefully the vandals won't start gaming for autoconfirmation. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:01, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--v/r - TP 21:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, friend
I have written a proposed remedy to the Richard Arthur Norton affair, to be taken to AN/I in the event that ArbCom defers the case. Since the original thread is hatted, the proposal has been made on his talk page (User_talk:Richard_Arthur_Norton_(1958-_)). As you were a participant in the original thread, I would very much appreciate your comments as to whether the proposed remedy satisfies your concerns. Thanks, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 23:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll take a look when I get a chance. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
for correcting my edit here. Cheers! Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 01:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem! - The Bushranger One ping only 01:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Advice needed
Some IPs keep adding Qaher-313 to Fifth-generation jet fighter article, in spite there being no source to back up this claim, either on its main article, or in the added refs. Usually, i would usually add a {cn} tag instead of removing the aircraft, but in this case, the aircraft has a section titled Doubts of viability of aircraft in its main article - there is a doubt about it being just a model. And there are many reliable source available about the plane, but far from calling it a 5th generation, they doubt about its viability. In fact, even the official media of Iran has not called it a 5th gen aircraft. What should i do? Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 13:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've posted a note on the 5gen talk page that if edit-warring continues the page will be locked until the matter is discussed and sources found (or not). - The Bushranger One ping only 18:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks you. Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 18:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

DragoLink08
Could you perhaps give more input on the DragoLink08 situation and the consequent rangeblock for the University of South Florida? I've just gotten a message from Hflw27, who says "I may be able to help with range configuration - I'm in the CSE department of USF and may be able to track down relevant and necessary details. I know that the 131.247.2.* and 131.247.3.0-64 blocks are regulated static IP addresses for Engineering". I'm going to leave a message on his talk page explaining that I implemented the rangeblock on others' recommendations, that I don't really know how to help, and that I'll ask others to help him; if you can help, please respond at his talk page. Please note that you're not the only one I'm asking; I'm leaving this message for five other users who commented on Drago's situation at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive783, as well as you. Nyttend (talk) 02:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunatly, I know very little about rangeblocks (as in, I know they exist...), so I can't be of much help. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you know anything about Drago's general behavioral patterns? If so, it might help.  Nyttend (talk) 13:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't say that I do, no; the extent of my knowledge of the case was coming across that AN/I report, seeing the wall o' socks, and suggesting the banhammer might be considered. - 13:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I only asked people from the discussion who appeared to be familiar with Drago — sorry for misunderstanding your involvement and bothering you thus. Nyttend (talk) 14:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Refusal to donate to WMF
I have never donated to the WMF and I refuse to do so until an administrator blocks all the administrators (except LessHeardVanU) who have blocked me in the past. So, what do you do next? Cla68 (talk) 05:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Now come on Cla, is there a real need to come here from Wikipediocracy just to make a point? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Amusing how everyone of the people there completely missed the point...although, of course, I suppose that's to be expected. (Especially amusing as I've never donated a penny myself.) - The Bushranger One ping only 06:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, but you're still welcome to block most of the admins who have blocked me in the past. That would only be slightly more farcical than what occurs in most WP admin forums on a daily basis. Cla68 (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Rockwell
Thanks for cleaning up Template:North American Aviation aircraft, and moving the HiMAT article to the proper name. I saw the needs, but didn't h ave the time to address them. - BilCat (talk) 08:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem! The templates are fun to mess with for me. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
I had approached another moderator to fix the issue, but I am also happy with your action. Thanks again. The Banner talk 02:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad to help out. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Adding my thanks. Brocach (talk) 10:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Baja California (region)
Why did you delete Baja California (region), it seams like a plausible redirect to me. We have articles such as Macedonia (region), West Midlands (region), Transjordan (region), etc. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Honestly? At this point, I can't remember. You can feel free to recreate it. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

bridge articles
Any bridge articles I can work on and try to promote to good status? --Starship9000 (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, dunno. Maybe this one? - The Bushranger One ping only 00:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * What should I add to it? --Starship9000 (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Basically, all of the useful and informative information and data you can reliably source. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Zan Perrion (2nd nomination)
Hello The Bushranger: It appears that the article Zan Perrion may have been deleted without an accurate discussion of the number of sources, their depth of coverage and their availability regarding the subject. I'm considering taking this article to Deletion review; per the instructions there, I'm sending you this message to discuss the matter first. Also note that there's a working version of the page, which I had userfied, located at User:Northamerica1000/Zan Perrion. Please respond at your convenience, and thank you. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The first AfD for the article resulted in keep based upon the sources presented therein. The second AfD resulted in delete, without a full analysis of the available sources about the subject.
 * This subject appears to meet or pass WP:BASIC. Here are some sources that confirm this, , , . Several are non-English; Translate.google.com may be useful to read them in English.
 * Also, per WP:NRVE, topic notability is based upon the availability and depth of coverage of reliable sources, rather than just those that may be present in an article.
 * Wow...I can't agree that the individual is sufficiently notable for an encyclopedia article. What a ... well...no more to say (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If there's sufficient sources that have been found since July, then WP:DRV #3 is appropriate. - The Bushranger One ping only 12:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello The Bushranger: If you're all right with it, I'll take this to DRV. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:49, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't have any objections. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Zan Perrion
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Zan Perrion. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

How 'bout them mangoes?
They are quickly becoming a major pain in the ass. Funny how those zealots always end up hurting their own cause. Drmies (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That is, indeed, the greatest irony of all, isn't it? - The Bushranger One ping only 16:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm probably the worst thing that ever happened to medieval studies. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Ikitsuki Bridge
I really want you to help me improve the Ikitsuki Bridge article because it has not been improved at all and the article may need to be improved or it may be more likely proposed for deletion. Please go help me with the Ikitsuki Bridge article. Thanks! --Starship9000 (talk) 00:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added a reference. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

hi

 * You should be a bit more careful then - leaving your account open so it can be compromised is a good way to have it be blocked, and the 'sibling defense' doesn't work so well for unblocks. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Lost in Wikipedia
I trust [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=537967042 this] was submitted while running around in circles and circling your arms above your head??? (I'm referring to the edit summary, not the content, of course). NE Ent 02:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Have no fear, Smith is here! - The Bushranger One ping only 03:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion Notice of Page and Ban of edito
Dear Mr. Bushranger,

I don't come to you for assistance unless I consider it important, like that time a person with roll back authority, was reverting any edit that used PM/PS articles from Google Books as sources (it was really kill airplane pages for Bzuk and me). And one time I got emotionally involved on pages concerning health issues and got reverted and I was told I was wrong and came off my high horse and admitted it and apologized to the editor in question.

When I first came to WP I got in a lot of trouble, by stumbling into the rules. The only thing that kept me from being banned was the fact a few good editors assumed I did what I did in "Good faith." The problem I bring to you is an editor (I don't know if he is an adm.) who does not "Assume Good Faith.") It is over this page on AVSIG.  I was contacted about it because I write articles on military issues including aircraft and on AVSIG they have an Aviation History Section. I looked it over and told them, you don't post a page and fill it in, but to do a sandbox (that is why I thought it was put up for deletion).  I contacted the person putting it up for deletion in a polite manner at is talk page.  Lord! I couldn't believe the angry sections.  Never seen that many in my time on WP.  The section where I posted my inquiry was at this page. As you can see I almost got my head taken off.  Also notice in my original message I said I was leaving the original message where it was and copying it to a sandbox. And that with my help, I would gathered more info (all I do is Av History my only interest, don't and never had a pilots license) for the article it would be reviewed before posting. Then I looked at his page. Go to the bottom, and you will see he is a Wiki Fanatic who brags he is cruising to delete messages.

Finally, some how or another the manager of AVSIG got banned the same day as the article was put up for deletion for writing the article in dispute. In my opinion it is not Spam. The General People don't join AVSIG. It exist (way beyond form) for information on safety on private aircraft, pilot and aircraft safety certification, etc. Then it made history by establishing the first non-book keeper/tax forum on Compuserve (then the only game in town) so pilots could get weather and schedules, by using Compuserves phone network (internet then was defense and colleges). It is not an organization that exist as a forum, but an organization that has a forum. But either way could not Bwilins assumed good faith. I mean to tag a file for deletion and then ban that editor also -- that is the nuke option. He could have waited till the sandbox was finished and then made the judgement. But an editor who collects, deleted pages like scalps and chastises the editors is not the WP way in my opinion. Thank you for listening. - Jack E. HammondJackehammond (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The person who created the article, I presume is the manager of AVSIG? His username violates WP's username policy; having your username be the name of your group or business isn't allowed; since he created a Wikipedia article on his own orginsation without clearly establishing notability outside of it, that is 'spam' by Wikipedia's definition. As for Bwilkins, he can be...let's say prickly, at times...but in this case I don't see bad faith on his part - that notice isn't "bragging" or "hunting for scalps", that's a simple statment that there are some pages that should be deleted, vis-a-vis some other editors (who I won't name) who consider each and every article, on anything, sacred and will miscite policies to keep. Not to say on AVSIG either way, of course. But in this case, while he could have been more diplomatic in his reply to you perhaps, I honestly don't see wrongdoing here. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Dear Bushranger,


 * Thanks for the fast reply. I told them, that I was taking it to someone who was not a Wiki Fanatic and was fair.  But I also said "Once he makes a ruling that is it. And if he says the article should be deleted it goes."  I hate to see some people on Wiki just argue a subject in the ground.  Finally, is there any way the ban can be removed on the author: He did not intend it as Spam. Honestly I know him - not personally - from my days as an AstSysop with Compuserve. He is a very ethical person. The charge for the forums is mainly to keep trolls and Spammers out, not to make money. He would charge a lot more if that was his purposes.  Again thanks for your time. Jack E. HammondJackehammond (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries; glad to help out. Now, what he needs to do is to post using the Unblock-un template, in which he suggests an alternative username that doesn't reflect the name of his group/business, and a statement that he understands and will abide by WP:SPAM and WP:COI. If he does that, there's a reasonable chance that he'll be able to be unblocked and his account name changed to one that complies with the policy. Good luck! - The Bushranger One ping only 09:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Lost between CFDS and CFDW
Somehow this * Category:Anti-tank guns of Japan to Category:World War II anti-tank guns of Japan got missed between CFDS and CFDW. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I took a second look at it (having been the speedy nominator) and realised that renaming it would break the tree it was supposed to be in, so I withdrew the nomination instead and may create the target as a seperate category soon. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * And thanks for catching those two rifles categories I missed! Completely overlooked 'em, I probably should get some sleep. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Deutsche Luft Hansa Flight 7
It looks like Ryan has done it again....William 20:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep, thats him. His WP:OWN-driven socking has reached the point of deliberate trolling and should be treated as such. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes its gotten to be trolling. Like you, I've pitched him the standard offer and my support if he'd behave for a year. Apparently he'd rather not be a wikipedia editor anymore....William 00:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe with this he'll finally get the message... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Newcrash created this: Hebridean Air Services. --Starship9000 (talk) 13:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding that, but all of Ryan's old articles are well past G5 by now - it's only the new socks that produce stuff to WP:DENY. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * DragonflySixtyseven, another admin, deleted all the articles that were created by sock of a blocked user on November 13, 2012 such as The Fly (roller coaster). --Starship9000 (talk) 01:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That one had no substansial edits by anyone else. G5 allows for those articles to be deleted, but it doesn't require it. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * What did I do? Let me know next time you're talking about me behind my back, gosh.  Just kidding of course, I was worried for a moment because popups only showed me the initial line. Ryan Vesey 21:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

FanPage Edit
I'd like to get some clarification on why you added the FanPov template to the Mike Will Wiki? I created the page and I realize there are a lot of fans attempting to update in the past days. I'd just like some guidance on which of their edits to delete to clean it up and have the banner removed. Thanks Ddotf (talk) 19:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, for one thing, the repeated use of his stylised name kinda strikes me as "yeah, that Mike WiLL, he's just zis guy, you know?" - like it's being written "by fans, for fans" instead of encyclopedic style. That was the main thing that jumped out at me. Also, lines like "Kayne West called up (so-and-so)" - "called up" isn't the kind of wording you'd see in an encyclopedia. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much. The Kanye thing did catch my eye when I took a second look. I'm attempting to find the post/edit where that was added. This troll of a user Youngsmoke added tons of crap that I'm just catching and I suspect it was his/her doing. The 'stylized' notes just started with this Koala user. Once I go through should I just send you another note for you to remove the FanPov template? Or can I delete? Thanks again for the help! Ddotf (talk) 20:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say that once you clean that up you can WP:BEBOLD and remove it. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Haha! Thanks again, really. I cleaned up the article (may go through again for good measure) and removed the template.Ddotf (talk) 20:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Glug glug glug...thanksh! - The Bushranger One ping only 21:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Cold War ICBMs etc categories
Hi Bushranger, In case it's skipped your notice, BHG and myself have replied to your comments at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_January_23. DexDor (talk) 06:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I did miss that. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion Notice of AVSIG page and banning of editor
Dear Bushranger,

This will be my last comment on this subject and it is not to save the AVSIG page or get the banned editor's block removed, but hopefully in the future when a familiar party is involved you will remember what I say that in this case it is as the famous quote goes "There is something Rotten in Denmark." Again, sorry to bother you again so soon with this case. But the more editors say something, the more over time you see a pattern.

Jack E. Hammond

.

Bridge GA's
How do I help promote bridge articles to good article status? On my archive talk page, it has a section on Roller Coaster GA's so I really need a thing on my talk page on Bridge GA's so I really want a note on the bridge GA's that way I can help promote bridge articles and nominate it to GA Status. Here is the list of the user boxes of the bridges I want to help promote to GA Status:




 * Thank you--Starship9000 (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I'm not really sure - my bridgework has been limited to the basics. You might want to ask at WT:BRIDGE. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:51, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Sorry to bother you, handy admin needed. You just posted at ANI, are you still online, and are you familiar with WP:RM guidelines? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * To some degree, yes. Is there an issue at RM? - The Bushranger One ping only 04:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's actually something not going via RM, slow burn edit-war-moving, I'd like to request an admin to quickly revert by WP:BRD before vi.wp editor YigMgo User:༆ sees it and reverts it himself. It's counter RfC and recent ANI to not keep making these moves. Is such a request appropriate? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ai yi yi, diacritics...I've dropped a note on the article talk page about how diacritics aren't used for Vietnamese articles anymore, if he reverts it again he should probably be rung up at AN/I. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No, the other way round. We have just had a series of RMs and RfC 27:16 which decided to use diacritics. YigMgo is the one restoring in line with RMs, RfC and consensus. There has never been a decision not to. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * An the warning at ANI was to User:Kauffner, I should have been clearer. Sorry. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, I see. Hmmm. I'm honestly not sure then - the last I've seen was that they weren't used, or so I thought. I'm afraid in that case I don't have the knowledge to step in, then - if MilborneOne or The_ed17 is online, perhaps they could be of more help? - The Bushranger One ping only 04:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Entirely my fault, a good reminder to be clear. Talk:Cà Mau etc. I'll look for those admins and if not revert myself. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy renaming of categories
Regarding my nominations on Categories for discussion/Log/2013 February 17 that are eligible for speedy renaming: should I delete them and retag the categories with, or just let them go through the CFD process? Trivialist (talk) 16:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You can leave them at the full CfD nominations - if nobody objects with in 48 hours of the nomination they can be closed and processed under the speedy rules from there. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks! Trivialist (talk) 16:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Correctly played

 * Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 17:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Tsing Ma Bridge
How is the Tsing Ma Bridge article. I cited lots of references. --Starship9000 (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It still needs lots more. The Good Article criteria need to be followed. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

WhiskeyHangover again!!!!!
Will you do me a favor? You should redirect WhiskeyHangover's talk page to his user page and then you should go protect it and let it only be edited by administrators? How's that? --Starship9000 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The way things currently are, is the way that things should be for all Ryansocks - anything else is just shuffling deck chairs. You should take a deep breath and really just relax. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding me? The RK socks is used for damaging and doing crazy jokes to aviation articles? --Starship9000 (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No, not kidding you. Things that have been done are the things that can be done, there's no point in getting stressed over it. And the sad part is Ryan isn't "damaging" or "doing crazy jokes" - he's actually writing articles on notable topics. If he would stop socking he could be a value contributor per the WP:STANDARDOFFER. (Also, it should be noted that trying to get all his old articles deleted is something Ryan has tried. So trying to get them all deleted could cause some to wonder if you were one of his socks. So be cautious.) - The Bushranger One ping only 22:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I must be mistaking. I added couple of references in the Tsing Ma Bridge article. Is that good and is it ready for GA Status? --Starship9000 (talk) 01:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's nowhere near GA ready. Please read the GA standards. Among other things, there must be at least one citation in every paragraph, preferably more. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Where in the article? --Starship9000 (talk) 01:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Every paragraph... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 01:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Ryan kirkpatrick socks
All 54 of Ryan's sockpuppets created articles Cavehill plane crash,Delta Air Lines Flight 821, and other numerous aviation articles. Delta Air Lines Flight 821 was created by WhiskeyHangover which needs to be proposed for deletion and Cavehill plane crash which was created by Niceguy771 and deleted by GB fan. In fact, these aviation articles were created by Ryan kirkpatricks sockpuppets. I think Newcrash and Niceguy771 are both completely newby sockpuppets and these are WP:DENY. Thanks! --Starship9000 (talk) 14:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding those. However, Delta Air Lines Flight 821 has been edited substantially by others and thus WP:G5/WP:DENY doesn't apply; it cannot be speedy deleted. Basically at this point, unless a new Ryansock turns up - unlikely, as his primary IP is currently rangeblocked for one year and 364 days - all Ryansock creations are stale with regards to speedy deletion. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:35, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Which Ryan sockpuppets did you blocked? Tell me the names of the Ryan kirkpatrick sockpuppets you blocked. --Starship9000 (talk) 14:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't keep a personal list. The data is in the logs. Why the strong interest in Ryan's socks? - The Bushranger One ping only 14:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * As of February, Ryan has 54 socks and 7 extremely. Some of them are IP's. Ryan and his socks all edit and create aviation articles. The Cavehill plane crash article was deleted by GB fan, another administrator on January 26 and created by Niceguy771. Let me know if any Ryan sock articles should be proposed for deletion by twinkle of speedy deleted. Whats WP:DENY means? --Starship9000 (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It means that, when possible, a banned editor should be denied recognition - but common sense needs to be applied as well. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you do me a favor? I would like you to go leave a note on Talk:Tsing Ma Bridge and write down some improvements I should make to it that way I nominate it to good article status. In fact, I can leave you some events about Cavehill plane crash. --Starship9000 (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I can tell you right here, actually - the main thing that article needs is references, references, references - it's pretty extensive as it is. As for Cavehill plane crash, you should contact User:WilliamJE, as he's the editor who's primarily involved in "rehabiliating" deleted-per-G5-but-still-notable Ryansock articles. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I was either the one to Prod Cavehill or I endorsed the prod....William 01:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I will do that now on the Tsing Ma Bridge article right now and add references. But any sections that needs a reference? I will tell the editor you told me. --Starship9000 (talk) 14:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Every paragraph, every potentially challengeable fact. You might want to read WP:GA?. - The Bushranger One ping only 15:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I can put one for the Tourism section. --Starship9000 (talk) 15:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I putted a reference for the Tourism section. Hows that? In fact, Ryan kirkpatrick needs to behave and he needs STOP creating sockpuppet accounts if we unblocked him but he is sstill CREATING those accounts which are sockpuppets and to abuse our editing on Wikipedia and all 54 socks creates and edits aviation articles. --Starship9000 (talk) 16:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Trust me, we know this, you're preaching to the choir. Also, the rest of the article still needs referenceing per the GA standards. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I will add more references to meet the GA. --Starship9000 (talk) 16:18, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Death of Shane Todd
I AFD the article but its like a file. Can you please fix this? Thanks....William 01:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's been sorted? - The Bushranger One ping only 01:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Revdel request
Hi The Bushranger. A named person was recently spuriously included in a historical event. For obvious reasons I won't repeat what happened. I notice you're an active admin at the moment. Will email you very soon.--Shirt58 (talk) 08:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Revdel'd and sent to Oversight. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 16:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Canvass?
Is someone canvassing for votes at Articles for deletion/Murder of Brandon Brown?--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No idea, but I added the tag just in case, given the tone and quantity of discussion going on there - when an AfD gets that long and loud when I come across it while scanning AfD logs, I add it just to be sure. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good then! Although I think I'm the longest and loudest... if you would, I have a separate question:  do you have any insight into what makes one page a memorial and another an article?--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not too familiary with that area of things, aside from I know it when I see it, but basically it would probably depend on the extent of coverage of the event, particularly if it has persistence, and also the "tone" of the article - if it sounds more like a biography of the person, how good they were, how tragic, etc., it's probably a memorial; if it's more about the event and (for want of a better term) is "dry and factual", it's probably not. - The Bushranger One ping only 17:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

New article
While adding new articles to this month's newsletter, look what I found, a list of 2012-13 NASCAR Transactions. Is this even notable? Which would be the proper way to nominate for deletion? --  Nascar 1996 ( Talk •  Contribs ) 21:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's pretty much A10 - duplicating the "changes" information in 2013 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series. I've gone ahead and redirected it to there. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:English vegetarians
How come the above category was not deleted with the rest following the CFD?? Yours, Quis separabit?  19:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There apparently was a typo in the nom where it was nominated with the rest, but "Scottish vegetarians" was listed twice instead of "English..." then "Scottish...". - The Bushranger One ping only 19:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I spotted that when I was processing the others, and put that one in to be processed as well, as it had been tagged. – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Post Cold War tanks
Hi Bushmaster, is the proposed speedy renaming of Category:Tanks of the post–Cold War period etc necessary? If by-conflict categories are being deleted/upmerged (and replaced by categories like the cats for aircraft e.g. Category:Military vehicles 1950–1959) then wouldn't interwar/postwar cats go as well? A rename now would add to the category churn on people's watchlists. Note: I can't edit the Speedy page because of a size limit on what I can upload. DexDor (talk) 05:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not sure. There's the possibility they might be kept - especially the "Cold War" ones - so IMHO it's better to go ahead and rename them now, in case of keep, instead of having to rename them later. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Precious again
  reviewing eyes

Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who reads this looked at one more article it could be over today. - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (18 November 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 34st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I miss the photographer, again, and put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll see if I can help out some more if I get the time and brainpower to spare. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Is Revdel needed
here on the talk page? (IP posted email info) I am not sure, so brought it to your attention. Thanks! Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 14:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Zappa'd it. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a strange term to use.  Zappa O Mati  00:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ...heh. It comes from El Goonish Shive. "No zappa the kitty!" - The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha thanks! :) Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 09:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Samjiyon Airport
You selected the name 'Samjiyon Air Base.' Samjiyon Airport is the common name. Please google. Show me that 'Samjiyon Air Base' is correct, and 'Samjiyon Airport' is not correct. Sawol (talk) 05:17, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Somebody needs to change the infobox, though. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Help needed
Could you take a look at User:Armbrust? Armbrust The Homunculus 19:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * My plead is on Armbruster's talk page. Regards, Gerhardvalentin (talk) 19:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied there. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Bushranger, I thank you and Armbruster also, for having solved my problem. Gerhardvalentin (talk) 20:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Help w/ Brennan Newberry and his ROTY status
I am completely lost on this subject. As you know, Truck Series driver Brennan Newberry made 10 starts for his dad's NTS Motorsports team in their first year of competition. The ROTY guidlines state that no driver can run more than 5-7 races while still eligible for series points in one year and can be eligible for ROTY the following season. Perfect case of this is Ryan Blaney, who made 9 starts last year, had switched to earning Truck Series points at Atlanta, and is therefore ineligible for ROTY. I resorted to contacting NTS through FB (yes, it is original research) but I honestly can't reason why Newberry is a ROTY contender despite what the rulebook says. So, I was hoping you could try and help me out with this thing. Thanks!Gaeaman787 (talk) 19:10, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As you might be able to tell by my most recent edits, it gets worse, as according to the Practice 1 sheet for the Truck Series, Blaney is running for rookie of the year! The only thing I can figure is that the maximum number of races a rookie-running-for-points could run was raised to 10 races without anybody commenting on it... - The Bushranger One ping only 19:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I know, I just saw that as well, that Blaney's a Rookie contender now -_-. I have to agree with you, it must be that they bumped it from 5 to 10 without announcing it at all. Because Blaney and Newberry ran less than 11 races, which is half of a season. But NASCAR hasn't announced anything (I don't think) about the change in ROTY eligibility.Gaeaman787 (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, 7 to 10, but still. It would also neatly fit with Danica having run a 10-race schedule, too. It would really be nice if they told people about these things, wouldn't it? I sent a ping on Twitter to Ray Dunlap asking if he knows anything, maybe they'll mention it on the Truck broadcast! - The Bushranger One ping only 20:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, well, well, seems it was so. Reply: "Correct. New rule for 2013!" Now to find it somewhere other than Twitter to cite it... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sweet!, hopefully NASCAR should announce something at some point. I feel as though this is going to be some kind of Trevor Bayne rule because he's run more than half a season for 2 years now. I feel like the new rule will be a max of 10 races irregardless of series eligibility. I actually just realized that Travis Pastrana also made 9 starts last year, but isn't considered a Nationwide ROTY contender. So now the plot thickens...Gaeaman787 (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I was wondering about that with Pastrana, too. Hopefully they'll actually put out a "here are our rookies" press release like in previous years... - The Bushranger One ping only 04:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * They wont -_-. Try tweeting Pastrana or something, maybe he himself decided not to declare for ROTY?Gaeaman787 (talk) 06:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This says he isn't eligible, but also says because nine races. So...hm. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, I just got a response on FB, says that the rule is only for Trucks. Its a max of 10 races one year to be able to compete for ROTY the following year, so both Blaney and Newberry fall under that new rule. Don't have anywhere to cite yet thoughGaeaman787 (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That...makes no sense whatsoever. But eh, the rulebook's in pencil anyway! - The Bushranger One ping only 18:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

about Cavehill plane crash
Here is the events on the Cavehill plane crash article so far:
 * The article was created by Niceguy771, one of the Ryansocks, which I do not know the date it was created.
 * You added the WP:PROD template on the article on January 19, 2013 and the concern was:Non-notable accident. Article created by sockpuppet of banned user. Generic title unsuitable for redirect/merge. WP:DENY
 * You also blocked the sock at 23:47 on the same date the WP:PROD template was added .on the article
 * The article was deleted by GB fan on January 26, 2013.

Any more thoughts for the events on the article? --Starship9000 (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Er, no. And I'm honestly perplexed as to why this holds such a fascination for you. A sock appeared, was whacked, the article was deleted, that's all folks. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:09, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well RK (abbreviation for Ryan kirkpatrick) needs to stop creating those accounts and is that the only reason for his block? Are we impressed with him because I don't think we are impressed since he creates lots of accounts. As of February 2013, he has 148 socks and 13 extremely sockpuppets. Ryan needs to stop creating lots of accounts because that is sockpuppetry.Any New York or New York City bridges I can work on to help get it to GA Status? --Starship9000 (talk) 19:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes he does, we all know that, and he knows that but refuses to stop socking, so until he does, that's that. I don't follow NYC bridges, sorry. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Unblock
Dear friend, as a beginner, my user was blocked last year due to a conflict in editing one article. Because it didn't sound 'right' accoding to some, it was banned and claimed as a hoax. Since now I am aware of the facts, please be kind and remove the restriction for user 'cabbynet'. One year has passed ever since and I'd like to learn new skills on Wikipedia. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.5.19.27 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 February 2013‎ (UTC)
 * If you would like to request unblocking, you need to sign in to your account and post unblock on your account's talk page. As a note, given that you were blocked, not for hoaxing but for haivng been here to troll, you'll need to make a good case to be unblocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:23, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

talkback notices for me
Do you often leave me talkback notices on my talk page. To do it, add this. I think you should leave me talk back notices on my talk back. Thanks! --Starship9000 roller coaster lover  00:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As a rule, I assume that if somebody leaves me a message, they will be watching for replies. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Tsing Ma Bridge
Is there anything needed in the Tsing Ma Bridge article before I nominate it to GA? -- Starship9000  (roller coaster fan)  02:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Er, yes. Lots. More references, on every paragraph, for instance. Right now it would be a quick-fail for lack of referencing. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I will do that tommorow. Bye and see you tommorow! -- Starship9000  (roller coaster fan)  02:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Slip of the tongue
You closed the Categories for discussion/Log/2013 February 17, as "The result of the discussion was: result."

The edit summary says "delete", which sounds more likely :) -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * more likely a slip of the finger :D Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 12:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blargh, I hate it when I do that! Fixed, thanks for the catch. - The Bushranger One ping only 17:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (February 2013)
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 02:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Overkill on revdel?
Despite your edit notice, I don't like to revert other admins without getting the full story to make sure there isn't something I missed. Now I know I'm breaking WP:DENY and giving the attention, but I'm of the opinion that the last 3 edits of User:Mreconomist57 (a sock of CCCC) are not within the spirit of the revdel policy. Of course you could go on to say that G5 is justified under criterion RD5 (surprisingly the same number...). But if you read up from the criterion, it says "The community's decision was that RevisionDelete should not be used without prior clear consensus for "ordinary" incivility, attacks, or for claims of editorial misconduct". But also as it tagged under RD3, RD3 is for edits that make text changes that would crash the ordinary browser or links to virus attack sites etc. I don't really understand why this socks particular edits need to be hidden as we don't hide them with other socks. Furthermore, you removed the username of a user right from the contribs of a talkpage...the username itself isn't disruptive and I highly doubt could be covered under RD3 or RD5. Can I get your two cents on my view? -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, in the past, other admins have entirely deleted the entire talk page after one of these socks has posted there, then selectively restored the page while leaving the contributions of the CCCC socks deleted. I was merely following on in that vein - deleting and selective restoring would have been a major pain trying to figure out what old, delted-by-others contributions not to accidentally restore, hence my nuking the disruptive content (my reasoning for selecting RD3) in the fashion I did - removing the username was in the same spirit, "leave nothing to acknowledge their presence". That said, if you think it's overkill, I have no objection to your undoing the deletion, as you caught me here just as I need to head off for the night. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:45, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * While revdel is certainly a good alternate for selective delete, I took a reread over the CSD policy and G5 says as a condition "and which have no substantial edits by others". While it does appear that revdel wasn't in mind when the policy is written, I don't think these revisions are disruptive enough to remove either. So in this case I am going to reverse it. Thanks for your opinion and understanding. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  20:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Alrighty then. In the future I'll refrain from pushing the big red button and riding the bomb down, too! - The Bushranger One ping only 00:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Butt paste
Nice article; I just checked it off for DYK. I wonder what BLP hell will be roused when someone sees Template:Did you know nominations/Stefan Matschiner. It's a balanced article, I think, in that it has the most positive thing I could find about him--he ran a heat in a European championship. Drmies (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh. Ve shall see! Thanks for the hook tweak, btw; I kept looking at it sideways thinking it looked funny, but couldn't place exactly how. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter
Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:
 * , primarily for an array of warship GAs.
 * , primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
 * , due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with, this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:
 * , whose Portal:Massachusetts is the first featured portal this year. The featured portal process is one of the less well-known featured processes, and featured portals have traditionally had little impact on WikiCup scores.
 * , whose Mycena aurantiomarginata was the first featured article this year.
 * and, who both claimed points for articles in the Major League Baseball tie-breakers topic, the first topic points in the competition.
 * , who claimed for the first full good topic with the Casting Crowns studio albums topic.

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by : did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 11:28, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

The 200 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal

 * Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 17:15, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats on this! Thanks for all of your hard work. Ryan Vesey 17:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Kevin Ray
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

lost
Floating around out there in cyberspace there is an edit just like this with my sig. on it too. :-) How ya doin BR? — Ched :  ?  00:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Doing well enough, thanks. And also just having added this to the sum total of human knowledge! - The Bushranger One ping only 00:48, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Very nice. Good job.  DYK maybe? — Ched :  ?  20:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's a little short for a stormtrooper DYK, but I might see if I can scrape up more stuff this week along with being a bit more sesquipedally loquacious. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

When is a deleted article not deleted?
According to your edit at WP:AfD Incruit on 31 January 2013, the article Incruit was to be deleted: its still there over a month later.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It was undeleted by another admin, presumably through WP:REFUND. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:34, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Does that mean the talkpage should be undeleted too?shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * As the only content was WikiProjet tags, no, those can simply be readded as appropriate. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:41, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Please review the deletion of page Philip_H._Friedman
Good morning,

I believe the page at address: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_H._Friedman was deleted erroneously. I would like to request that this page be re-instated.

Dr. Philip H. Friedman is an acclaimed psychologist and published author. There are dozens of scholarly references recognizing Dr. Friedman dating back as early as the 1970s through today. Please review the below as examples:

1. Spirituality, Religiosity, and Subjective Quality of Life

RL Piedmont, PH Friedman - Handbook of Social Indicators and Quality of …, 2012 - Springer ... These are the questions that research on spiritual coping attempts to answer. ... transcendence represents a universal human capacity to stand outside of one's own immediate existence and to view life from a broader, more integrative whole. ... Forgiveness and Gratitude and QOL ... Spirituality, Religiosity, and Subjective Quality of Life

2. [BOOK] The Forgiveness Solution: The Whole-Body Rx for Finding True Happiness, Abundant Love, and Inner Peace

PH Friedman - 2010 - books.google.com Dr. Friedman believes that at the root of almost all emotional problems is unforgiveness (grievances, judgments and attack thoughts)--towards others, ourselves, our circumstances, God, anyone or everyone. The Forgiveness Solution is an easy to learn, practical and ...

3. [CITATION] Friedman Well-Being Scale and Professional Manual: Manual, Questionnaire, Scoring Sheets. Sampler Set

PH Friedman - 1994 - Mind Garden Cited by 12 Related articles Cite More

[4. CITATION] The relationship between forgiveness, gratitude, distress, and well-being: An integrative review of the literaturePH Friedman, LL Toussaint - International Journal of Healing and Caring, 2006

Cited by 4 Related articles Cite [PDF] from wholistichealingresearch.com

5. [PDF] Changes in forgiveness, gratitude, stress and well-being during psychotherapy: An integrative, evidence-based approach

PH Friedman, L Toussaint - … Journal of Healing …, 2006 - wholistichealingresearch.com ... Gallo, F. and Vincenzi, H. (2000) Energy tapping. ... Watkins, P., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. (2003) Gratitude and happiness: development of a measure ... Philip Friedman, PhD is a licensed clinical psychologist/psychotherapist and Director of the Foundation for Well-Being ...

6. Forgiveness, gratitude, and well-being: The mediating role of affect and beliefs

L Toussaint, P Friedman - Journal of Happiness Studies, 2009 - Springer ... with these approaches to defining gratitude and have formerly defined gratitude (Friedman and Toussaint 2006b) in a way that focuses on the inner emotional experience and the cognitive-attitudinal belief set. 1.3 Definition of Well-Being The meaning of happiness has been ... Cited by 30 Related articles All 8 versions Cite

7. [CITATION] Creating Well-being: The Healing Path to Love, Peace, Self-esteem, and Happiness

PH Friedman - 1989 - getcited.org ... Author: Friedman, Philip H. PUBLISHER: R&E Publishers (Saratoga, Calif.). SERIES TITLE: YEAR: 1989. PUB TYPE: Book (ISBN 0882478419 ). VOLUME/EDITION: PAGES (INTRO/BODY): xvi, 212 p. SUBJECT(S): Mental health; Happiness. DISCIPLINE: No discipline assigned ...

8. The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction

W Pavot, E Diener - The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2008 - Taylor & Francis ... Pavot, W and Diener, E. 1993. Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5: 164–172. ... Pavot, W and Diener, E. 1993. Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5: 164–172. ... Cited by 159 Related articles BL Direct All 2 versions Cite

9a [CITATION] The effects of modeling and roleplaying in assertive behavior

PH Friedman - 1968 - University of Wisconsin Cited by 86 Related articles All 2 versions Cite More

9b. [CITATION] The effects of modeling, roleplaying, and participation on behavior change.

PH Friedman - Progress in experimental personality research, 1972 - ncbi.nlm.nih.gov 1. Prog Exp Pers Res. 1972;6:41-81. The effects of modeling, roleplaying, and participation on behavior change. Friedman PH. [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]. Publication Types: Review. MeSH Terms. Adolescent; ... Cited by 15 Related articles All 3 versions Cite

10. [CITATION] Personalistic family and marital therapy

PH Friedman - in Clinical Behavior Therapy, New York, Brunner/Mazel, 1972 Cited by 20 Related articles Cite

11. Integrative family therapy.

PH Friedman - Family Therapy; Family Therapy, 1981 - psycnet.apa.org Abstract 1. Presents a 3-dimensional model to aid in the integration of different approaches to family theory and therapy. Metaphors from different family therapy approaches are classified within the structure of the model. Various characteristics of integrative family ... Cited by 12 Related articles All 2 versions Cite

13. Family system and ecological approach to youthful drug-abuse.

PH Friedman - Family Therapy, 1974 - psycnet.apa.org Abstract 1. Contrasts the psychodynamic approach to understanding youthful drug abuse with an approach based on an ecological understanding of the family system.(35 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) Cited by 12 Related articles Cite

13. Outline (alphabet) of 26 techniques of family and marital therapy: A through Z.

PH Friedman - … & Practice; Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & …, 1974 - psycnet.apa.org Abstract 1. Reviews 26 techniques of family and marital therapy to serve as a guide for the beginning therapist. Such techniques as contracting, restructuring, modeling, and self-disclosure are briefly outlined, similar methods are noted, and references are cited for ... Cited by 7 Related articles Cite

13. The use of computers in marital and family therapy

PH Friedman - Journal of Psychotherapy & the Family, 1985 - Taylor & Francis This paper summarizes the author's experience using a computer in marital and family therapy in six major areas:(1) client intake and records,(2) assessment/evaluation/tracking client changes,(3) client feedback,(4) client information and instruction,(5) financial ... Cited by 6 Related articles All 3 versions Cite

14. Limitations in the conceptualizations of behavior therapists: Toward a cognitive-behavioral model of behavior therapy

HF PHILIP - Psychological reports, 1970 - amsciepub.com Summary.-This paper proposes a cognitive-behavioral approach to behavior therapy as an alternative to the counterconditioning model presently in vogue. The key terms in this model are cognitive appraisal, threat, counterharm resources, behavioral coping action ... Cited by 4 Related articles All 3 versions Cite

Also recently in Google News

1. Philip Friedman, PhD | Wellness Times

Forgive for Your Health. www.wellnesstimes.com/users/philip-friedman-phd Philip Friedman, PhD's picture. Philip Friedman, PhD. Dr. Friedman is a licensed clinical psychologist and psychotherapist in Plymouth ...

2. Forgiveness in the Family: When and How?

Hosted by Randy Rolfe, JD, MA, Bestselling author, family therapist, and wellness educator

Our guest for this show, Dr. Philip Friedman has spent much of his professional life exploring this issue and has published a wonderful book called The Forgiveness Solution. Please listen in to get some wonderful insights on how this powerful approach can make your family’s life happier, healthier, easier, and more fun. 13, 2011

http://www.voiceamerica.com/episode/53754/forgiveness-in-the-family

http://www.amazon.com/Philip-H-Friedman/e/B0034PXQY0/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1362322656&sr=8-1

24.0.187.139 (talk) 14:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The article was deleted according to consensus after two weeks of discussion. If you wish to make a case for the article to be undeleted, you should do so at deletion review. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:29, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

up for deletion
Thought you'd want to know: Articles for deletion/Boudreaux's Butt Paste!

Star767 (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's good to see that article become the butt of some improvement! - The Bushranger One ping only 18:33, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I still don't know why NASCAR would allow such a stupid name on a car. Ah well, can be worse, like "Perry's Penis Paste" or something.  Zappa O Mati  20:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, they didn't allow redneckjunk.com or the Sons of Confederate Veterans... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Page moves
Hi, you recently moved a couple of class article pages (specifically Albacore-class gunboat (1855) and Bramble class gunboat (1886)) because there are no other classes of this name. True, there aren't other articles at the moment, but there were other classes so named. An 1883 class of Albacores and an 1898 class of Brambles. Both gunboats. There's a similar situation with some other ships, there were three lots of Amazon-class frigates (four if you include the Type 21s). Given the example of King George V-class battleship (1939) and King George V-class battleship (1911) and the guidelines at WP:NC-SHIPS I would think this distinction needs to be retained, much as we pre-emptively disambiguate the individual ships if we know there are others that would make it eventually necessary. Benea (talk) 18:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Already moved them back after seeing your comment at CFDS. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:57, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * So you did, damn that was fast. I am duly put to shame for my slow speed today! :) Many thanks! Benea (talk) 18:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Philip H. Friedman
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Philip H. Friedman. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 24.0.187.139 (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Johnny Ray (racing driver)
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

CSS Texas
Why do we need a date for this ship it's not as if there were a host of Confederate navy ships after the Civil War, not following the logic here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There were two ships named CSS Texas - the original page is now a shipindex explaining it. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I see this makes more sense now that I've seen what you were doing. thanks for taking a moment to explain. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:54, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries! - The Bushranger One ping only 07:54, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Pluralization of class templates
Hi Bushranger. Would you mind not pluralizing class templates, as you did here please? The class articles are singular (as in Amphitrite class monitor) and IMO the templates should follow suit. Gatoclass (talk) 06:16, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, IMO, the templates should not follow suit, as it is gramatically odd and the template is about the ships, hence plural. But if you wish to raise the issue at WT:SHIPS, I'll pause pending discussion. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll do that, thanks. Gatoclass (talk) 06:20, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No prob! - The Bushranger One ping only 06:20, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅ Gatoclass (talk) 06:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

 * OM NOM NOM SHO GUD. Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 06:34, 6 March 2013 (UTC)