User talk:WilliamH/Archive 4

User:Wrist Instability
If you're in a mood to block indef-blocks from editing their own talk pages, I wonder if you'd mind taking care of this one. He was told to stop soapboxing, and ignored it. Thank you! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅. WilliamH (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks


TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thanks for indefinitely blocking the sock puppet vandal of my user page.TomCat4680 (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Cheers, but User:Camaron actually did the blocking - maybe he'd like one too. WilliamH (talk) 18:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

User:.IT
You have deleted my latest article based on advertising, whereas it's discussing a technology with credits to it's makers. I do not know if you have any experience with large format printers, but things like bleeding are a real problem to the quality of printing. A technology that cures those aches is no less innovative as the interface of the iPod for example. But nobody touches that page and it's more commercial minded than the one I created. So I ask you fair & square to reconsider the deletion. Thank you .IT (talk) 08:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Please see the notability criteria for groups and companies, in particular, the WP:PRODUCT section, which will demonstrate whether a subject may justify inclusion. WilliamH (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not understand, it links me to another company. Forgive me my ignorance, but what is there to learn from that page? .IT (talk) 15:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, it had been completely defaced. Check it again. WilliamH (talk) 15:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. I can offer you various independant sources backing up the use of the technology. From international magazines to reports of researchers. But I have a feeling you also had a problem with the tone of the article, what would you like to see altered? .IT (talk) 08:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Intelligent Interweaving technology
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Intelligent Interweaving technology. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. .IT (talk) 10:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Old puppeteer, new puppet
A puppeteer whose puppets you blocked a few days ago is back to his old tricks. Chicagobears94 (with blocked socks Fitzgerald11 and Chicagobearz) is now operating the sock account Idonije71. He's made the same edit, inserting false information, to Israel Idonije as the master account, and one of the socks. Note that the third edit on Idonije71's talk is by the master account... before Idonije71 and his underlying IP bizarrely began copying barnstars from other users' pages... Anyway, please do whatever is appropriate here. Majorclanger (talk) 01:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Blocked, not by me though. WilliamH (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

SUCI Page
Hello William; please see that a Puppet of User:Kutan is editing this page to paste his personal vengance against the party. I am a relatively new comer to Wiki and I was dragged into the contraversy. I request you to keep a watch on this page. I have not reverted any edits any more. I have made a seperate section to include all the Criticisms. I hope that will solve his problem. But he has now badged me as a puppet of some one called SUCIIndia. Any ways, I am not a regular to Wikipedia. --Radhakrishnansk (talk) 18:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Myrtle Cottage
The user is now editing as User:LOL smartcar, and is impersonating an administrator again, this time by copying your user page. — Snigbrook 08:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Terrapinn
Hi, I noticed that you deleted the article under a different criteria (G11 instead of G12). I no longer have access to the article, but I seem to recall that albeit the article could be seen as promotional, it was also a copy'n'paste of copyrighted material, that made me pick G12 as an uncontroversial deletion criteria. Was I in error, or do you feel that the article could have been deleted under G12 as well? Thanks in advance. decltype (talk) 10:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I chose G11 because even if the author was the copyright holder, i.e., an employee of that company, the content was undisputably blatant advertising regardless of intellectual property. Cheers. WilliamH (talk) 12:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for the clarification. But would you consider the G12 tag (or a deletion per G12) an error, or simply another possibility? (Sorry I didn't adhere to your talk page convention) decltype (talk) 12:55, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Allen3 underlines it on your talkpage. For all extents and purposes, G12 would probably suffice, it's just that using G11 - which it undisputably satisfied - saves the deletion being unnecessarily protracted with a discussion about copyright. WilliamH (talk) 13:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Good point about protraction. Yes, I have decided to seek advice every time I misplace a speedy tag, because I see it as an indication that I do not adhere to the policy. It may turn out to be too tedious, but until now, I have learned a lot from it. decltype (talk) 13:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well done on being diligent. It's often the case that an article may satisfy multiple criteria. Keep up the good work. WilliamH (talk) 16:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC) This admin's tip: G1 is probably the most misunderstood criterion - if there are words, G1 does not apply!

Featured list removal candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Bloc Party/archive1
nominated List of awards and nominations received by Bloc Party for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion 0422  02:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

re Notice
Your sock now has rollback. Best, WilliamH (talk) 12:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Appreciated. --  FayssalF   - Wiki me up® 13:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Trout
Here's a nice plate of trout, broiled, buttered, encrusted with sesame seeds, served with a wedge of lemon and a congenial white wine. (Sorry, couldn't find an appropriate image file.) And don't sweat the rollback, man. It happens. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 13:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Baruch Myers
Didn't you see the hangon? Debresser (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it does not exempt an article from being deleted. Still, the chief rabbi bit is clearer, I must have missed it. Needless to say, that is clearly an assertion of notabilty and I would reject deletion. Cheers for bringing that up - I am after all, only human. WilliamH (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

It was precisely the Chief rabbi part I was surprised didn't save the article. But what I meant was, isn't hangon supposed to buy some time? Debresser (talk) 14:58, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, but no reason was given and I felt that it unquestionably satisfied the speedy deletion criteria anyway. On the contrary, I would say chief rabbi of a sovereign state is absolutely an assertion of notability - I daresay there's potential for a great article there so please, don't stop improving it on my account. :) WilliamH (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

We strive to please. Debresser (talk) 16:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Federico Macheda Article
Hey, I don't think there was any vandalism on the page, the subject had just come on as a sub for his debut so there was a bit of a scramble to get his page up thats all! Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 17:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment Dylan. Only users without an account are prevented from editing the article - users with accounts more than 4 days old such as yourself can still edit it. If you look at the article's history, you will see that practically every anonymous edit is vandalism, which can be easily prevented with finite semi-protection. WilliamH (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool, I'm not that familiar with protecting pages so I was worried for a sec that the genuine editors who'd started would be affected. I know how much of a pest the vandals are, good to see admins keeping an eye on them :-) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rollback
– PeeJay 17:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Markacohen
I'm having a hard time keeping track of the forums is complaining on, mainly about me, ignoring the fact that other editors feel the same. 3 today. Dougweller (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC) Ah, missed this: User:Markacohen - you're mentioned. Dougweller (talk) 14:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't you think a CheckUser request should be made? Cheers, --RCS (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, probably not. I'm inclined to think that it would be fishing. Unless there is material to suggest that the editor concerned is abusing multiple accounts... WilliamH (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Now he poses as a Jew, capitalizing "kosher" as it were.--RCS (talk) 16:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It is abundantly clear to me that we are not dealing with a good faith contributor. WilliamH (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Some
While we are at it - who is this man anyway? My online search wasn't exactly conclusive:. Regards, --RCS (talk) 12:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * He is/was Chairman of the New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education. WilliamH (talk) 13:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

JONATHAN BISHOP
Why does this guy get to use Wikipedia to post his resume?

He is clearly engaged in self-promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.185.151.92 (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

London 22
I'm a maybe - that's the middle of 2 weeks of intensive exams. --Deryck C. 16:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Careful now
- this is what watchlists are all about. Small edits like this are the most poisonous, sometimes. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 07:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed - well spotted! I was watching the insides of my eyelids when that edit was made. ;) WilliamH (talk) 10:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Request
Could you please watch this article? From time to time, vandals come up and remove content without discussion, explanation or whatever. Thank you, --RCS (talk) 14:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Request to participate in University of Washington survey on tool to quickly understand Wikipedians’ reputations
Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington. In April, we met with some local Wikipedians to learn what they would like to know about other editors’ history and activities (within Wikipedia) when interacting with them on talk pages. The goal of those sessions was to gather feedback to help design an embedded application that could quickly communicate useful information about other Wikipedians. We have now created a few images that we feel represent some of what our participants thought was important. We would appreciate it if you took a few minutes of your time to complete an online survey that investigates whether or not these images would be useful to you. Your quick contribution would be very valuable to our research group and ultimately to Wikipedia. (When finished, the code for this application will be given over to the Wikipedia community to use and/or adjust as they see fit.)

Willing to spend a few minutes taking our survey? Click this link.

Please feel free to share the link with other Wikipedians. The more feedback, the better! The survey is completely anonymous and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. All data is used for university research purposes only.

Thank you for your time! If you have any questions about our research or research group, please visit our user page. Commprac01 (talk) 01:06, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Additional details about our research group are available here.

Tests for Presence of Cyanide at Holocaust Alleged Gas Chambers
You took off my notation of the need for a citation to the report of the tests of Polish scientists for cyanide at the sites in question, and left a few words about a "clarification" that didn't seem to address my request for a citation. Would you mind telling me, perhaps with a few more words, or different ones, why you removed my notation of the need for a citation of this (alleged, but otherwise-so-far undocumented) test? Joe (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I removed it because I see little point in filling the lead section with superfluous inline citations when the point of contention (in that the Polish scientists discriminated against an unreliable factor, where Leuchter did not) is already mentioned and accurately cited in the article, as item 6 in the References section. WilliamH (talk) 17:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Just for clarification - did you mean Item 7 in the References? I went all the way through (the 50 or so pages of) Item 6 before noticing Item 7 and its apparent resemblance to what we are talking about. Joe (talk) 14:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It is correct that item 7 is the reliable experiment itself. However, item 6 is used as the citation because it describes the nature of the experiment. This is necessary because extrapolating one's own personal understanding would of course be original research. WilliamH (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Zyklon B
It wasn't the umlaut in Rudolf Höss I objected to (most English speakers can deal with them) but rather the character ß which I am not familiar with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weetoddid (talk • contribs) 21:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain further...
Could you please explain why you Europeanized Adil al-Jazeeri's name when you added the listas parameter to his talk page bio template?

Pleas be aware that Arabic names don't have European style surnames that are inherited, father to son. So, there is no point changing the order in which they are sorted in the categories.

Unfortunately there are some rogue bot, that routinely suggest to good faith contributors that they place these inappropriate Europeanized sorting keys on non-European names. I am trying to figure out which robot editing tools are spreading these errors - errors which are very time-consuming to correct. I'd appreciate it if you could tell me if you were using a robot assisted editing tool, and, if so, which one.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 02:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Eliminating Holocaust denial, as an example of a viewpoint held by an "extremely small minority," that has no place in Wikipedia
William,

I was wondering what you thought about the discussion on the NPOV talk page.

It concerns eliminating Holocaust denial -- as an example of a viewpoint held by an "extremely small minority," that has no place in Wikipedia -- from everywhere it appears in the NPOV policy.

Rico 01:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Josef Scheungraber
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

Featured Sound Promotion
Sedd&sigma;n talk|WikimediaUK 20:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Holy Shit!
Imagine my surprise that this wasn't written by you! Ironholds (talk) 00:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Your input requested
WP:EFL/WC. -Regards, Stevertigo 01:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Oscar Groening
I have started my review at Talk:Oskar Gröning/GA1. Please respond to and correct the more general points, then I'll move on to specifics. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 03:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a ping that the remaining lede problem is yet to be resolved. I'm happy to continue my work once it is fixed. Ironholds (talk) 11:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll start the review proper tomorrow, should be done by late afternoon. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Completed my review. Ironholds (talk) 12:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I'll pass it now. Congrats. Ironholds (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Epistemics of Divine Reality (2nd nomination)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Epistemics of Divine Reality, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Page deleted
Dear William,

Couple of days before, I created a page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CommLab_India. I just inserted the heading and a single line about the company. Next day my account got blocked and the page got deleted.

I was trying to create a page similar to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_messenger

Please let me know what shall I do to enable my account and the page.

Looking forward for your reply. --Saa.software (talk) 07:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Please note that where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest. Where it is apparent that an account relates to one of these interests, via its edits and/or username, it is usually suspended from editing Wikipedia. Regarding your apparent position in relation to the subject, this is why the account was legitimately blocked.


 * Finally, please note that Wikipedia is not a directory. Whether a subject is entitled to its own article depends not on how interesting, explaining, or useful the subject is, or whether other businesses/enterprises have their own article, but whether it satisfies the inclusion criteria. The relevant one can be found here. Thanks. WilliamH (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Stevertigo
Willima, do you remember ? From what i have seen of Steve, i wonder what has been and is going on. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Eduard Lorenz.jpg
File:Eduard Lorenz.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Eduard Lorenz.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Emil Mazuw
I saw Emil Mazuw at TT:DYK, and since my primary interest here is Pomeranian history, the name rang a bell. I went there to verify the hook etc for DYK, instead I expanded the article. You did good work, unfortunately (now that I have edited the article myself) I am disqualified for the DYKcheck. Please have a look if my additions are alright with you. Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Lately I have been overwhelmingly busy and have hardly had time to use the computer at all, so thanks for your intervention there. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 18:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

London Underground Graphics
Thank you for your comment on my uploaded graphics on london underground lines, i just felt that they were boring and were there for too long so i decided to do that. I do apologize for replying so late. Cherryguy93 (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2009 (GMT)

How Many Holocaust Articles?
I never tried before to count how many Wikipedia articles there are on a (large) subject, but I'm amazed at how difficult this seems to be. I've begun an effort based on the Categories system, but: (a) the Category structure of Holocaust subcategories is labyrinthine; and (b) articles (most?) in multiple categories will be double-counted. I imagine there MIGHT be a utility for dealing with this? Any guidance to this relative tyro would be greatly appreciated.--Joe (talk) 21:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of YouTube celebrities (4th nomination)
Since you participated in the third AFD, I am letting you know about the 4th AFD. Ikip (talk) 21:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, just so u know i posted an incomplete article and u deleted it and i just want to apologize for it. Jon218 (talk) 03:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, William! I just wanted to ask you for rollback right. I am autorewiever, and reviewer, and as i am using Twinkle for quite a while, i am de facto rollbacker. Also, i will use it just in cases of obvious vandalism, but mainly by banned sock returnees. That would be nice right to have. For more info, i am, sure, here! :) All best. -- Tadijaspeaks 22:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Granted, but per your comments, if you can't be 100% sure that an edit was vandalism, please use the undo button instead. Please note that the rollback right can be removed from your account at any time. WilliamH (talk) 10:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, i will be very careful, don't worry. :) -- Tadijaspeaks 12:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Current ANI thread
The previous ANI disussion, which you were involved in, Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Stevertigo/September 2009, is now part of an ANI discussion Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Stevertigo/September 2009's pattern of problematic editing, where you may or may not wish to comment. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Glad to meet you
Hi Will Nice meeting you yesterday at the London meetup. Very impressive snowballing RFA and WWII contributions! Thanks for all the hard work you have done for the Wiki. Hope to speak to you again soon! Cheers --Computor (talk) 08:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)