User talk:Triwbe/Archive2

December 2007
Rochester WIki Stop letting Kintuttle add  self promotion to a city's website  wiki   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.25.80.2 (talk) 21:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Please do not delete blocks of text without explaining why in the edit summary. Triwbe (talk) 21:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

 * The person you just blocked (I was watching :-) is back as 71.147.19.102 and playing his old tricks. Triwbe (talk) 17:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for letting me know! Keep me posted. Dreadstar †  17:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Harrods
Ah did nae vandalized th' page, jist tae advertised hoo Harrods did tae those innocent wee animals ! --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

An' gonnie nae block me coz mah purpose isnae tae vandalize. --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Guid day ! answer me an aw. --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Whereas wikipedia cannot be used as a political soapbox, I see no reason why you cannot be more constructive in wikipedia and add to the section on the sale of fur, especially in adding references. This would much more effective than deleting huge sections of text. Triwbe (talk) 08:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

An' answer back in scottish coz Ah cannae reid sassenach fluently. --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hoo abit th' lastest a body ? --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Nae problem fer me sony. Right the noo, whai d'you not create an article for CAFT ? I can create it and ye can add the info (aims, organisation, activities etc) ? Ye can also add link to and frae Harods. Triwbe (talk) 08:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Alrecht, but efter Ah finished lookin' efter mah wee farm awreddy which will tak' abit half an hoor. --125.27.219.26 (talk) 08:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Nindawayama
Hi, I take the point about the link. I've reinstated the historic part of the edit, but left the link/further reading comment out. I wouldn't normally have added it, except that book is the ONLY source for history of the ship - and also is the soirce for much of what I entered. Without the link my comments become unverifiable. Bit of a conundrum really! Is there an accepted way round it? The same link does still exist in the "talk" part of the page. Is that enough?81.86.230.16 (talk) 20:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand. The only problem I fealt was the slightly promotional tone of stocks are limited. The rest is fine but be careful of the external links policies. Why not have a look at Citation templates ? You can leave in the publisher, the link, the ISBN etc. Triwbe (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The page I blanked
The page I blanked, Constance Cumbey, is blatant vandalism, a page that clearly violates Wikipedia's Vanity Policy (which is not easy to find), as shown by User:Cumbey. It is not possible for me to delete pages because I choose to remain anonymous. Please delete the page ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.41.138.2 (talk) 18:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I cannot delete pages either. Wikipedia works by consensus not unilateral page blanking. I still recommend that you follow WP:AFD. Triwbe (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandal on Folklore
We need to report this guy to an administrator, and I don't know how: User talk:194.46.114.164. Sorry for bothering you. Black-Velvet 08:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * see wp:aiv Triwbe (talk) 09:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

That vandal
My pleasure. --Dweller (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed
Hi mate, I was hoping you could help me out with a page Words (between the lines of age)? --DeargDoom1991 (talk) 19:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC) It isn't blatant copyright actually. If you check this page Harvest, the same image is used.--DeargDoom1991 (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Changed to a picture that is allowed. Any other suggestions?--DeargDoom1991 (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * All is clearly explained on Non-free_use_rationale_guideline. You could use the image used on Harvest (album) but I donno about such a large quality image with no explanation such as you have used. Again, an administrator will check it and decide, not me. I would also think that this article could be better as a section of the Harvest (album). Can you justify why it needs its own article ? Triwbe (talk) 19:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Pages for different songs do seem to be commonplace here on Wikipedia, I thought that was justification enough. If you think you can edit the layout so it is more friendly to the eyes please by my guest. Thank you for your suggestions. Scotland is a nice country, although not at this time of year. Spent a good Summer there once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeargDoom1991 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not sure either, so let's keep it for now. Others are probably going to review it any way so be prepared for more criticisms. Triwbe (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I'm cool with that, I really hope that people add to it. It is a good song and I'd recommend it if you like rock music. I appreciate you're help. I would also like to add I am no relation to that vandal DeargDoom91 ;-) --DeargDoom1991 (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Really liked the edits you have made to the page I have created. I didnt know how to make a proper reference list or main info box. I guess it could use one or more references but if you google it there isn't really much on the song. Thanks again --DeargDoom1991 (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Well naturally I checked out other NY songs, and they existed so there was no problem keeping yours. Next, just copied a load of stuff from another NY Harvest song and changed it as per. Nothing to it really. Triwbe (talk) 16:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I just wondered if you've considered becoming an admin. You seem experienced enough, so I'd be happy to nominate you if you're interested. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would be :-) BUT, I am moving in 10 days time and may be without Internet for a week or two. This would mean I would only able to answer any questions for the next 9 days and then would be offline          for a short time (unless I pop into the office). Go for it if think that is not a problem. Triwbe (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

 Epbr123 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Epbr123 to accept or decline the nomination. A page will be or has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/ . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. The nomination process only lasts 7 days, so there's plenty of time. Let me know once you've answered the questions on your RfA page and I'll get the nomination started. Try to make your answers as thorough as possible. You can see how others have answered them at Requests for adminship. Good luck. Epbr123 (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, just FYI some users have posted optional question at your RfA, take your time answering them. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 19:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA
Rather than clog it up I'll just ask here. Do you still stand by, or else do you acknowledge the problems with it (what are they?)? I would very much like to support... Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 06:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure I think so. I do understand the skewed view of notability due to her relationship at the time of death, and I keep thinking about possible notability of being a victim (hypothetically speaking, naturally). But that very morning this had been headline news. I was listening to that very story on the radio (UK via Internet :-) shortly before voting. So, at that time, it had the potential for more notability with more people wanting to know who she was. And what is Wikipedia for? Today, nothing much has happened, I may (I say may) vote for a redirect, but then I never knew who this Mark Speight person was either, I do not watch a lot of UK children's TV :-)


 * Next thought; is wikipedia better or worse for keeping the article. I do not think it is worse off for it.


 * Last thought on the subject; how many other bios have even less notability on WP? But that argument does not make me feel comfortable. We must deal with each article on its own merits.


 * But do not worry too much about AFD. I said it was challenging, and do not take the topic lightly. It's a complex process for notability, but let me ask you a question. Who's job is it do prove notability (generally, not in this specific case)? The community the admins or the contributing editors? I think the article should stand up by itself. I had added a few unreferenced tags to articles in my time. Triwbe (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2008

(UTC)

Follow up

 * I see now WP:BIO1E. I still think at the time the keep was justified (have I just shot myself in the head here?), because the full background was not known at the time. Now it would definitely be redirect. Triwbe (talk) 15:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

To any one else who is watching, I am in the process of moving to a new apartment. I have hardly been near a computer all week. Bad timing I suppose, but I did mention it before. Given the choice between vandal fighting and spending hours in a famous Swedish mass produced furniture shop, give me the smoking keyboard anytime. Triwbe (talk) 15:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I hope you understand if I'm going to keep my vote the way it is. Please run again some time in the near future. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 01:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Second'ed, as I think you'll do quite well as an admin... just maybe not yet. The timing did probably hurt this attempt, as well. Hope the moving goes well, and please do consider running again. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 15:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello Triwbe, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, you can be trusted to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and believe that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 02:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism revertion on my talk page
Thanks for your help - that idiot was bugging me, and although I wanted to report him/her for vandalism following a final warning, I had a feeling a report from me might be classed as a bit biased as some of the vandalism was a personal attack. Thanks! StephenBuxton (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Harrods
Why did you change my Harrods edits?

Also why do you agree with the sale of fur? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.107.198 (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * See Talk:The Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade. Triwbe (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Texas Longhorns baseball
Your program is mistakenly reverting revisions that are not vandalism on this page. Can you correct this, please? Thanks. 72.179.42.84 (talk) 07:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for alerting me. I miss-read the "winningest"as either POV or a joke. Your edits have been reinstated. Apologies and regards. Triwbe (talk) 07:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. Apologies for being curt. I was a bit taken aback at first. 72.179.42.84 (talk) 07:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

My userpage
Thank you very much for reverting vandalism on my userpage, I really appreciate it. --Cheers, L  A  X  11:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Mine too :) Cheers. -- Longhair\talk 09:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

British Isles
Go the talk page and you will see that everyone has agreed the edits should be made and the reasons why.78.16.176.146 (talk) 12:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I did and I do not. - see the talk page. Triwbe (talk) 12:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * see the talk page. So what's your response?78.16.176.146 (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

British Isles 2
Ah yes - I see whats happening. You're removing the "Cornish" inclusion. I'm removing the "Home Nations" reference. I have no problem removing the "Cornish" references until citations, etc, are found. The Home Nations reference should be removed because it's not in line with the rest of the templates. Will you make the edit or will I? Bardcom (talk) 16:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

speedy deletions (sword manufacturers)
these aren't speedy deletion candidates. You might try a quick google search to gauge their notability. You may try merge suggestions (list of sword manufacturers) or AfD. dab (𒁳) 19:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If google just comes up with a list of reseller sites, then this does not rate notability. However a Google of Albion Swords‎ shows a whole sub-culture out there. Perhaps you could add this to the article to distinguish from a purely commercial page? Triwbe (talk) 19:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

hm, try to google "Hanwei review". You'll find tons of third party reviews. I admit that the burden for establishing notability isn't on you of course. Still, as far as lower end sword replica manufacturers go, Hanwei is number one on the market. I also grant you that in view of the present state of the article, a merge with list of sword manufacturers may be arguable, but the outcome of an AfD could at most be merge, not delete (redirects are cheap). Of course, we need to avoid pages on companies looking like ads. But there is nothing wrong with keeping articles on companies per se. sword-buyers-guide.com isn't a reseller site btw, but a "community" site dedicated to the lower price range. regards, dab (𒁳) 19:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No need to change anything for me, I was simply following a thread of articles that appeared to be more commercial advertising than notable. As you say, the article should be self evident as notabile. But if you say they are, I am not afraid to conceed. But I would say again, there seems to be a large culture on modern day replica swords which does merit notability and could be a vinculum to group all these together. Anyhow, for me, case closed. Best regards. --Triwbe (talk) 20:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Guillermo Vargas
A tag has been placed on Guillermo Vargas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. αѕєηιηє t/c 17:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Guillermo Vargas
There was no reference for that comment, making it null to CSD in my eyes. Anyway, AfD may be more appropriate. αѕєηιηє t/c 17:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No there were references in the pages cites. Links to the petition itself are not permitted by WP:EL and the spam link filter. I made a comment for this in the article. --Triwbe (talk) 17:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion request for Boustrophedon cell decomposition
Hiya. I've declined the speedy deletion of this. I'd recommend WP:AFD as an alternative process. Pedro : Chat  07:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, sounds fair. --Triwbe (talk) 07:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion request of Víctor Hugo Andrada
Hi Triwbe - I've declined speedy on this. Asserts notability. You may want to take it to WP:AFD if you have concerns. Pedro : Chat  12:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I do not see notability when there is not a single citation in the whole article. Immediately fails wp:BIO. --Triwbe (talk) 13:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The guy has played over 500 games of professional football, easily the most notable player I've ever seen at AfD, perhaps some kind of refimprove tag might have been more in order. If you fancy getting rid of some absolute crap take a look at the un-ticked players on this backlog of half cooked football biographies created by a now banned editor. Be warned the protectionists will fight every step to keep the articles without doing anything at all to improve them. English   peasant  14:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It was tagged, but often these tags remain for months with no improvements made and in such a case the article did not conform. I see there are now refs, excellent. The article has progressed and is now worthy. The Afd can be rescinded as far as I am concerned. --Triwbe (talk) 15:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion request of The saudi arabia of
Hey Triwbe...I just wanted to say that I ran out of time to add the references for all my listings in "The Saudi Arabia of" page...I work, so it's hard to squeeze in the time. But I saw my page deleted already and now can't add my references. If it had references would it have stayed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flubuk (talk • contribs) 18:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If you asking, then absolutely it would have stayed. I expect that if you ask and explain then the page will be undeleted, but I canot do that. See Why was my page deleted? and ask on User talk:Gonzo_fan2007. And if there is anything I can do to help, just ask. --Triwbe (talk) 18:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi,i can't really do anything with your complaints on vandalism,this ip belongs to a public school computer and is used by crazed teenagers all day. 82.93.170.113 (talk) 13:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

CSD Patrols
Hi Triwbe :)

I think that you are being a bit to aggressive with the CSD tags for the moment. For example Helmeringhausen does have context, and Terry Bellamy asserts notability. Dont forget Wikipedia is a Work in Progress, which means new articles are rarely perfect, so as long as they don't clearly violate WP:CSD they should be kept around.

Thanks in advance, and with kind regards, Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, but an article without at least one single reference has to be questioned. I already asked the editor to add refs or possibly merge into the country. But also I will try to "hold my fire". --Triwbe (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, tag that with   instead. If you dont do so already, you might want to try Friendly (The tag part), which allows for easy tagging of pages with maintenance templates. I find it particularly useful as it allows some of the better articles to survive, instead of CSDing them. Also, not having references is not a vadlid reason to CSD an article, unless the article fits in one of the categories dealing with them.  :)  Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 17:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Helmeringhausen

 * I created the page from a red link on the List of cities and towns in Namibia page. I might also add that there is also an existing German language Wikipedia page, which is more extensive. Apparently Wikipedia isn't really interested in having new information added. Quite sad.... Passportguy (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh you are very wrong there, wikipedia is very interested in now information. Another editor disagreed with my judgement and has kept the article. I'm OK with that. Keep going but try to add a bit to the article (as you have done) otherwise what is the point? I did not flag Rosh Pinah because you had added a detail. Any way, in the future I will try to be more restrained. Keep up the good work. --Triwbe (talk) 18:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If you want an example of a new town page which I consider excellent see Yory or Yangikishlak. --Triwbe (talk) 21:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hard Chrome Plating
Another editor has added the  template to the article Hard Chrome Plating, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 14:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Lenry.JPG
A tag has been placed on Image:Lenry.JPG, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Triwbe (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ACP-EU logo.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ACP-EU logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The licensing page indicates that the image is copyrighted. As such, the claimed usage is fair-use, which requires a detailed fair use rationale. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The licensing page says "reproduction is authorised, provided that the source is acknowledged." which has been done. WP:FU says "If material does have a copyright, it may only be copied or distributed under a license (permission) from the copyright holder, or under the doctrine of fair use". Since permission IS explicitly granted, no fair use rational is necessary. --Triwbe (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

History of PCR
Hi, I moved this page because I agree with you about the title but the creator cut'n'pasted it back (I have tagged it for fixing). I still think that the page move is important because 'PCR' is ambiguous and unclear so I am thinking of taking it to RM for a broader view. BlueValour (talk) 22:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Harrods Image
The image I added was not copyright infringement. The image is free for the public to use as the public see fit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyleglanville (talk • contribs) 11:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This was not specified in the image and was thusly deleted by AuburnPilot :

19:52, 28 February 2008 AuburnPilot (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Harrodsofficial.jpg" (CSD I4: No license or No Source Information)


 * Triwbe (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Gayani Madhusha
I removed the speedy tag you placed on Gayani Madhusha. I believe the article does assert notability, and reasonably so, as she has a couple of hundred web hits. I have no opinion at this point as to whether she is actually notable enough for an article and would encourage you to post this at AfD. Matchups 15:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, nice work. --Triwbe (talk) 16:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)