User talk:The Talking Mac

IPhone 2.0
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on IPhone 2.0, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because IPhone 2.0 fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: All speculation To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting IPhone 2.0, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate IPhone 2.0 itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 08:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

What do you have against robotics manufacturers? Rhenbelz 19:15, 5 April 2007

IPhone 2.0
A "" template has been added to the article IPhone 2.0, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Have a nice day. Running 21:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on MONDO Turf, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Vgranucci (talk) 17:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Trojan Balllistics Suit of Armor
An article that you have been involved in editing, Trojan Balllistics Suit of Armor, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Trojan Balllistics Suit of Armor. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 15:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 20:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of East Prairie School
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article East Prairie School, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Spiesr (talk) 19:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion tagging
Hello! When you add speedy templates to articles, like you did to Nevill Road Junior School, can you put a note on the author's talk page to warn them? Alerts them to the proposal and allows them to respond if they want to. Cheers, A v nj a y Talk 19:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, concerning this particular speedy tag, schools are explicitly not speedy deletion eligible, therefore I removed your tag. I recommend taking the article to WP:AFD if you strongly feel the school's article needs to be removed from Wikipedia.  Thanks,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  19:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Bensen-related articles
No problem - I'm very happy to help out, and it's great to see our coverage of Bensen's interesting and often off-the-beaten-track work get expanded. A few random comments, in no particular order:

Please be careful with copyrights! It's simply not sufficient to cut-and-paste someone else's work and just switch around a couple of words, as you did with the B-10 and B-12 articles. To make matters worse, the site that you cribbed these from (aviastar) is a notorious plagiarist itself, pirating text verbatim from other sources - I think practically the whole of Simpson's excellent book Airlife's Helicopters & Rotorcraft is scattered through that site. So lifting text from aviastar is actually lifting text from someone else. These two articles were so close to their sources that I actually deleted them and rewrote them from scratch.

I'm wary about the word "gyroglider". This was apparently coined by Benen for the B-5, and then used by him to describe the B-6 though B-8. More generically, these aircraft are called rotor kites. Bensen did the same thing with his autogyro designs, coining the word "Gyrocopter" so that he could trademark it. While it's true that he doesn't seem to have ever actually trademarked "Gyroglider", I think this word is better reserved as a name for referring to specific Bensen models than as something like a genericized trademark (ie, "the B-6 Gyroglider was..." but not "the B-6 was a gyroglider...")

Cheers --Rlandmann (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've actually put the Mid-Jet back to where you put it. The way that we organise aircraft content on Wikipedia, we don't generally have separate articles for separate variants of aircraft, and based on the information provided by Vortech, the Mid-Jet appears to have been just a B-6 variant. To be consistent with how other aircraft are written up, this would normally be included in the article on the "parent" type, which is why I merged it. On further reflection, I came to agree with you that the design was sufficiently different to warrant its own article. It's not always an easy call to make.


 * When in doubt, we're generally guided by the names and model numbers assigned by the manufacturer, and the fact that Bensen gave this one-off aircraft a distinct name of its own (rather than, say, "B-6M" or "B-6J" or something) was a major deciding factor; together with the fact that a set of significantly different specifications was available for it.


 * If you're interested in some of the issues involved, you can read more about them in the draft notability guidelines for aircraft. --Rlandmann (talk) 23:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)