User talk:VanishedUser sdu8asdasd/Archive 4

Steven Hydes
It's sourced to BBC and The Guardian - I wonder why you tagged it as inadequately sourced? Pam D  19:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It could do with one more citation, or at least some of the stuff in the article having some kind of source (his current family setup, for example) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 19:35, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Turkish women writers
Thank you for withdrawing the WikiProject Turkey/Article alerts AfD. I didn't notice until after the withdrawal anyway, but is a notable subject, just wasn't sourced. I notice also the above - I did not call Kauffner, a "major idiot," what I said to BDD, unquote "I hadn't noticed Kauffner being a major idiot on Eastern European names - he supported the TENNISNAMES thing, but only as a cheerleader, no worse than 2 or 3 others, he didn't do any G6, undiscussed moves or initiate silly RMs." that's all. That might imply that I thought unnamed others were being major idiots - such as got one life banned and earned two others topic blocks - but those ANI bans/topic blocks would suggest ANI thought the same. As far as moving articles counter RM and RfC results I remain of the view that where an RM or RfC has taken place unilateral and undiscussed moves contrary to results is not helpful editorial activity. All the best. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem with withdrawing the AfD, and I'm not really looking to get further drawn into that dispute. You probably said some dumb things, and Kauffner probably did as well. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 15:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. If you see me say anything dumb by all means tell me, cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Merseyrail, Tyne and Wear Metro". {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;"
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot  operator /  talk  18:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Minors and privacy
Speculating about the possible ages of possibly extremely young editors, on an extremely widely-watched public noticeboard, is unwise and unhelpful. I realise it's far from an ideal solution, but I suggest the only sensible outlet for your concerns - in this or future similar cases - would be to email arbcom directly. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're probably right, I'll remove the age bit of the comment, unless you did so already. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 19:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thank you for your enthusiasm at WP:AfD. However, please be more careful in the future.

Bearian (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2013 (UTC) 
 * Thanks, I presume this is due to the several "nomination withdrawn" AfDs I've had recently? :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 20:58, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High, while for quality the scale goes from Low  to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:05, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Precious
  mediation

Thank you, goalkeeper, for quality contributions to articles on trains, sports and flights, such as Widerøe Flight 710, and for mediation with understanding, "just because someone is foreign, and because they don't attend your place of education, doesn't mean they have no right to edit the article", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, and it's not a problem - this is also perhaps the most unique thank-you message I've received! :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 09:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I got better at it, do it more or less daily for more than a year now ;) - I learned it from others, especially the photographer of the sapphire, who made my day in 2010. I am foreign, so your line really pleased me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I make mistakes too
Hi Luke. Thanks for volunteering your time on Wikipedia. I was reading your userpage and saw I make mistakes myself, and I'm willing to rectify them if they are pointed out correctly and good-naturedly by editors whom follow the principle of WP:AGF - something I try to do myself.. I make mistakes too. Usually spelling mistakes. I made a bunch while working on Our Mr. Sun. I have a dynamic IP you can see my contribs here so sometimes people make assumptions about me. I've gotten used to it over the years. When I think it will help, I'll politely point it out to them and sometimes I get a positive response, like here. I figure it might help other IPs when I let people know IPs are not so bad. Anyhoo, I thought I'd leave a polite note about it since you had that note on your userpage. Kind regards and thanks for volunteering at Wikipedia. 64.40.54.202 (talk) 22:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you are a dynamic IP, which is the entire basis for my comment - the comment you made strongly hinted at the OP being the person whom opened a section. What I don't understand, if you are a regular contributor, why not create an account? It'll keep your IP private (less of a concern for a dynamic IP, but still a valid one), and get rid of some of the stigma editors - including me, as I am often anti-IP - will attach to you. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 07:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * why not create an account? I have a huge list of reasons, but the biggest one is because I think Wikipedia is important. That probably doesn't make sense, so I'll try to explain. Wikipedia is powered by volunteers. No volunteers means no Wikipedia. That means Wikipedia needs to encourage people when they volunteer in order to keep them and attract new ones. As an IP, I can judge the health of the project and where it's going because I'm treated like an IP. I know if Wikipedia is atracting new volunteers or repelling them by how I'm treated because I'm treated just like every other new user. So I can make realistic suggestions on how to improve Wikipedia because I know how the rest of the world views Wikipedia. I'm an outsider viewing Wikipedia and how it operates as opposed to an insider looking out and wondering why people aren't volunteering. Hope that makes sense. 64.40.54.241 (talk) 09:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That's quite an interesting reason, and it's something that I hadn't necessary thought about. Each to their own, I guess - I'd rather have all my contributions in one place, so people know exactly what I'm doing, and don't think I'm trying to hide something. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 09:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The general idea is quite common in quality control areas and is often refered to as a mystery shopper. The more general form is known as participant observation and is used in studying human interactions and behavior. 64.40.54.241 (talk) 12:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DRN
Thanks for the notification. I have not been able to edit today (not even as Difficultly north) due to being busy with some work. Actually that was my first DRN as well but it seemed appropriate. I had been awaiting the comments by BigScribe before I added anything but obviously that's not needed now. I will keep an eye on the Sockpuppet case.

Merseyrail has always been a difficult article. A lot of unreferenced material has been added over the years and looking at the history I am wondering now if it is mainly the same person that has added the material. And if it is, what should be done? But I don't want to seem like this is an attack on one person. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 17:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, if the SPI clerks agree with my observations, then pretty much most of the POV-pushing has been added by this editor, it would seem. I didn't actually realize you had an alternate account, but then, I don't generally research users xD (unless filing an ANI or SPI) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 17:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. I assure you my other account falls under WP:SOCK. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 17:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware of that :) I considered making an alternate account for usage in school, but decided against it, as I can guarantee I'd double vote, or something else that was stupid. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 17:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Btw, do you think BigScribe should be informed or left? Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 20:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think he should be informed, to be honest. If he'd looked at the DRN when it was still present, he'd have found it then. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 20:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 19:21, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Requests for Comment: Proposal for rewording WP:NSONG
Hi, an RfC has begun which proposes rewording WP:NSONG. As you participated in a related discussion, I invite you to join the RfC conversation. Regards,  Gong   show  04:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

advice on detail
Since you have made comments on yearly tennis pages and other comments you've made seem pretty lucid, what are your thoughts on 2012 Serena Williams tennis season? The creator of these series of yearly pages is very protective on their content almost to the point of ownership, but my concern is that pages like this one are going overboard on the yearly detail. Yes he complains about tennis project guidelines about no scoring in prose and limiting flag icons, but that has long been decided and my only concern right now is in the content. I could chop these down to half their size (and did to one of them but it was reverted). Instead I tagged the two biggest offenders (imho) with too much detail tags in hopes that someone else might help out one day. They were reverted also. So they either stay as they are with more to come (which I can live with if that's what people want) or more editors need to comment or put the tags back up to try and streamline some of these articles. It seems in tennis articles there aren't a lot of editors that want to comment on these things so they hang in limbo for quite awhile. Anyway, a penny for your thoughts. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The page you've linked is absolutely ridiculous. Obviously I've made, several times, the point that I believe these should only be located in decently-sized paragraphs in the main article, but let's discard that opinion for a second. There are tonnes of superfluous sentences, such as:
 * "Williams' came into the WTA Championships with no warm-up events having withdrawn from the Asian Swing."
 * "Williams came into the US Open trying to be the only third woman after Steffi Graf and sister Venus Williams to win Wimbledon-Olympics-US Open in the same year."
 * "Williams won the first set with a break, and won the second set with a single break."
 * "Both player kept their serve until the 4th game where Williams had to save 3 break points."
 * I would also note that these examples are unsourced as well. There are serious issues with some of the other sentences, in terms of grammar, spelling, and syntax, such as:
 * "Williams came into the US Open trying to be the only third woman after Steffi Graf and sister Venus Williams to win Wimbledon-Olympics-US Open in the same year." (again)
 * "However, Williams was forced to withdraw with a lower back injury as a precaution heading into the French Open.."
 * "Both player kept their serve until the 4th game where Williams had to save 3 break points." (again)
 * "Serena paired with sister Venus at the London Olympics in Women's Doubles, they are the defending champion from winning in the 2008 Beijing Olympics."
 * It's really weird: there are some very short sentences that should be merged together, and then you have enormous sentences, devoid of punctuation, that either need said punctuation, or breaking up. There are several spelling mistakes in there as well. And this isn't even getting to the point you were making: the detail is absolutely ridiculous, and inconsistent to the point of being absurd. In short, it's a mess. Given this user's attitude, which I would agree violates WP:OWN, based on edit summaries such as 'You are the only one who seems to have a problem mister "administrator"', "Always about your opinion and no one else's matter the scores on prose never got to an end and you guys just assumed that it did cause everyone got tired of it." (which is completely incoherent) and such, at best you need an uninvolved admin to have a word, most likely, an RFC/U or ANI, because I see personal attacks creeping in as well, such as . Hope this isn't too long! Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 19:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No that helps. After his innuendos I simply started questioning about whether I was being too hard on summarizing these things. Spelling and sentence structure can be easily corrected but since no one had commented on the talk pages I didn't want to seem like an ogre to this guy. He does a lot of tedious good work but seems to have no scope of compacting things and I certainly didn't want to get into an edit war. ANI's seem to bring out the worst in people so I asked for comments at project sports to see if maybe I can get more comments to appear on the talk pages. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt this user did their articles initially in good faith, but they need to be more careful spelling/grammar/syntax-wise (I'm bad at checking this sometimes, but I usually read through things after I've submitted, just to make sure) and they definitely need to tone down their ownership of articles. ANIs do bring out the worst of people, so if that RfC works, then that'll be good. Feel free to reference me in that discussion, I don't really intend to join it directly. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 20:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Keith Fahey
I have done the good article review for Keith Fahey, and placed the article on hold. Full review comments are at Talk:Keith Fahey/GA1. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Question about Schools
Hello, I am new to Wikipedia and I am trying to figure something out. I hoped you can help me. I attended Walt Disney Elementary School in Tulsa from 1994-1999. It has a Wikipedia page (I saw it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_Elementary_School_(Oklahoma).) Then, last night I was doing some research trying to figure out what languages are spoken in Myanmar when I came across a school there at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._(7)_Basic_Education_Middle_School,_Mandalay. The language and citations are much different from Disney, but other than that I can't figure out why one should stay and the other should go. I know it doesn't have anything to do with languages in Myanmar, but I am really curious. I saw that you had a link that said a person could ask you, so I thought I would take a chance and see if I could do that. Thanks! ForGreaterGlory (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a policy based reason that is relevant: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. However, in this case, I'm not sure that the Walt Disney school IS notable, and it certainly isn't if you were just using sources in the article. Now that you've pointed it out, it should be deleted as well, unless, as an ex-student, you have any WP:RS to prove it meets either WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 15:51, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Luken94 (and thank you for your welcome notice at my page ). There wasn't too much extraordinary about Disney except that it was named after Walt Disney. I guess that is why I was curious. There was the arson in 1980, but I wasn't there, then. Thank you! ForGreaterGlory (talk) 16:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, if you have any further questions, or want help with anything, you know where my talk page is. :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 16:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Coole National School
You said Coole National School was not notable. Master Gearóid Dardis attended this school, also Pauric and Michael Lyons and Barry Dardis attended the school. Plus Deputy Noel Dempsey TD, Minister for Transport in Ireland and The Reverend Father Thomas Gavin P.P. of Summerhill blessed this school. Baron Langford (talk) 09:53, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTINHERITED. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 08:57, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Dj Giovanni
I don't think it is for promotional page....it is just an information about that person which is famous if this article is to be deleted then there are other articles like Dj Aqeel which should have been deleted based on this articles criteria .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.222.76.214 (talk) 10:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The article is ridiculously promotional, with tonnes of irrelevant information, or information being heavily embellished. It doesn't satisfy any Wikipedia guidelines. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 10:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Consensus
With all due respect,can two or three persons force to add any lies,false and minor opinions as facts and truth on wikipedia? That specific editor has certain leanings as you might be aware of.His all points reflects a negative tone.Half truth of his edits sourced to opinion pieces cant form a neutral Article.He is doing his best to show this movement in bad light. In belief section according to him it is mixing with another opposite sect Shia. It is running non existing Jehadi groups. It is receiving imaginary fundings without telling clearly who is giving how much for What? Its founder failed in establishing Madarsas but not telling what were those failed attempts? Many more.... There is not at all consensus on Mezzomezzo's proposed biased contentious edits.A long dispute is continue relating to his contentious edits.You should understand dispute.Msoamu (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Msoamu, seriously, I think you need to actuall read WP:Consensus. It honestly seems like you just skimmed the lead. Also please keep in mind that the Civility policy applies to what you say about one editor even on a different editor's talk page, re: your comments about me having certain leanings and adding lies (which are apparently also supported by reliable sources which lie, but I digress). MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring
I don't see that you've been previously warned about edit warring, so I'm not going to block you, but you should not have reverted a second time at Barelvi. If Msoamu's edits are problematic violations of prior consensus, bring the matter up with an admin or at a relevant noticeboard. Reverting POV changes is not an exemption to the edit warring rules, so be sure to stay on the safe side. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I reverted a different edit... at least, I'm fairly sure I did. (As in, I don't remember that edit being part of those I reverted before) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 07:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's true that they were different edits. And you certainly didn't violate WP:3RR (our bright line rule on edit warring)...but whether or not edit something is edit warring is a matter of administrative discretion. In an article that's just come off of full protection, sometimes even the first revert can be considered edit warring. Again, I don't mean that you violated any rules here, only that it's always safer to err on the side of caution and, after someone tries multiple instance of POV pushing, make sure to bring their bad behavior up at a noticeboard. Then, if there's agreement that the other person is edit warring, they'll be blocked, and you or someone else can reasonable revert after that point. Another way of saying that is that except in BLP or copyvio cases, there's no terrible harm if the "wrong version" of an article sits up for a few hours while someone else looks into it. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm aware I'm being a little bit marginal, and administrator's discretion is perfect valid: I was merely pointing out that I didn't really make a second revert (although I had reverted that second edits, as had others, a fair while ago). I'm a bit fed up of this whole article mess, and we've been to ANI several times now with absolutely no result. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 08:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, Msoamu is now blocked for a week for edit warring; we can see what evolves during and after that period. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Help test new SuggestBot design
We have developed an exciting new version of SuggestBot’s interface with some cool features! Volunteer to be one of the first users to try it and help us make it better by answering a short survey! If you’re interested in participating, leave us a message on SuggestBot’s user talk page. Regards from Nettrom, SuggestBot’s caretaker. 18:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

You whacked me with a trout
You whacked me with a trout... what did I do this time? --Jackson Peebles (talk) 15:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Related to: Articles for deletion/Tanhouse lane railway station. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 15:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah. That's a good reason.  Thanks!  --Jackson Peebles (talk) 16:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Eric van Dillen
I hadn't noticed your edits, or I might have cleansed instead of deleting. Now restored with these edits, cheers  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  14:43, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, I've just seen a very impressive typo of mine that you fixed: how the fuck did I write "dox"? :D Thanks for sorting this, and you pruned out some of the spam that I missed (or some that I had just softened a bit) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 15:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)