Jump to content

User talk:MBisanz: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverted edits by Gestapotwodividedbythreesorryit'sabadmovie to last version by Pharaoh of the Wizards (HG)
Fangæ (talk | contribs)
19 edits
←Replaced content with 'Jew'
Line 1: Line 1:
Jew
Hi, This is just my talk page, feel free to leave any advice on my edits or ask for help on anything. If you feel I've abused my administrative or BAG powers, please see [[User:MBisanz/Recall]] for further instructions to request their removal.
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 5
|algo = old(7d)
|archive = User talk:MBisanz/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{AutoArchivingNotice|small=yes|age=10|target=./Archive 1|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:MBisanz/Archive index|mask=User talk:MBisanz/Archive <#>|indexhere=nein|template=User:MBisanz/indextemplate}}
{{archives|small=yes}}

{{User:MiszaBot/Trackers/CAT:DFUI|align=left}}{{-}}

== Deletion of Chronological list of Famicom games, 1989-1994, and possible deletion of Chronological list of Famicom games, 1983-1988 ==

Hello. I am a frequent user of Wikipedia, and the article Chronological list of Famicom games, 1989-1994 (http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Chronological_list_of_Famicom_games,_1989-1994&action=edit&redlink=1) was recently deleted because of its similarity to List of Famicom Games. The major difference between the lists, however, is that the deleted page contained the Japanese-text name of each game; this was considered a trivial loss in the discussion on its deletion, but I can assure you there was no better list available in one place that was so easy to access for an English user. Many of the individual pages for these games do not contain their Japanese-text name equivalent, and will leave people having to stumble through babel-fish or google translate to try and come up with a good guess.

I would also like to point out that the deleted page (and proposed deletion page) contain many facts in the notes column about games that only have redlinks. This is a lot of information to lose should the deleted page not be properly restored or merged with the surviving List of Famicom Games page.

If the page is to remain deleted, please merge the column of Japanese-text names into the article List of Famicom Games. Please also consider doing the same for the proposed deletion of Chronological List of Famicom Games, 1983-1988 (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Chronological_list_of_Famicom_games). The loss of both lists would be a real tragedy.

[[User:Nesguy|Nesguy]] ([[User talk:Nesguy|talk]]) 23:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)nesguy

:Hi, yea, I'm sorry but the articles will remain deleted. If you like, I could send you a copy of the pages and you could merge what data you think is appropriate. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 04:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

::I would appreciate that very much, thank you. The source for those articles was a book not available in the United States, and as thus all the information is very hard to track down. [[User:Nesguy|Nesguy]] ([[User talk:Nesguy|talk]]) 18:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)nesguy

:::{{done}} Check your email. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 18:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== Afd Closures ==

Hi MB. I don't think these two closures [http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Memory_Alpha_(4th_nomination)] and [http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Eugene_Records] reflected consensus or the strength of the arguments, especially when there is a no consensus option. I'm not attached enough to either subject to propose a DRV, but I encourage you to reconsider. Neither outcome is a good reflection of the discussions that took place. Take care. [[User:ChildofMidnight|ChildofMidnight]] ([[User talk:ChildofMidnight|talk]]) 02:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:As far as I can tell, I only closed one deletion and you linked to it twice, and that there was a discernible consensus at the deletion debate. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
::I fixed the second link. There was a clear consensus that there was no consensus to delete either article. [[User:ChildofMidnight|ChildofMidnight]] ([[User talk:ChildofMidnight|talk]]) 07:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

===Memory Alpha===
I concur with ChildofMidnight on [[Memory Alpha]] - I came here just to ask you to reconsider and haven't looked at the other link. I had never heard of or seen that website but only commented at the AfD after finding sources at both Google books and Google scholar. Even without those it's pretty clear that the website is noteworthy on it's own and the AfD reflected this and is hard to see as a clear delete or keep. [[User_talk:Benjiboi| -- <u style="font-size:12px; font-family: cursive;color:#CC00CC">Banj<font color="#FF4400">e</font></u><u style="font-size:14px;font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:deeppink">b<font color="#CC0000">oi</font></u>]] 02:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

:So I took pause, and decided to go back and re-read all the comments at the AFD. And I'm still seeing it as Delete. The Delete comments focusing on the quality of the sourcing are more convincing than the Keep comments focusing on the profile of the site in the internet community. Regards. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
::I appreciate you looking at it again but see it more as a no consensus. [[User_talk:Benjiboi| -- <u style="font-size:12px; font-family: cursive;color:#CC00CC">Banj<font color="#FF4400">e</font></u><u style="font-size:14px;font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:deeppink">b<font color="#CC0000">oi</font></u>]] 17:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

===To DRV===

An editor has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#Memory Alpha|deletion review]] of [[:Memory Alpha]]. 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. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> [[User_talk:Benjiboi| -- <u style="font-size:12px; font-family: cursive;color:#CC00CC">Banj<font color="#FF4400">e</font></u><u style="font-size:14px;font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:deeppink">b<font color="#CC0000">oi</font></u>]] 17:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

== Move protection relating to the IWF malarky ==

Not paranoid, just realistic! Thanks :) [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 14:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== ronnie radke article Deletion ==

hello im extremely outraged that you have delated this article by all means their have been no such thing! you must be literally out of your mind i cant belive this somehow happened.

I do refer to some comment earlyier saying he plays on doing nothing eles and hes stuck in jail and hes just a "former" artist thats 100% absolutely wrong in fact if you want a realiable Source another compliant

just simply head to www.escapethefate.net their offical homepage you'll see interviews from jail from ronnie radke himself with future plans of starting a whole new band with previous member of ETF omar

along with amny other intrseting facts abotu the current band and all its memebesr so regaurdless if hes in jail or not theirs still recsent stuff coming out interview was sometime in october

I mean literally their is tons of infomation to fill this article thats still very appliable i think its Pathetic you'd even consider of dealted this article

and plain to the fact demand that it be restored Immediately

haha honestly you muat be crazy in fact i think todays the day that he even gets out of jail! so really are you kidding me you deatle his article the day he gets out sad

anyways please fix this problemm

[[User:Lordchs|Lordchs]] ([[User talk:Lordchs|talk]]) 14:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)lordchs

:Per [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronnie Radke]], the Wikipedia community feels that the individual in question fails to satisfy its criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Therefore the article has been deleted. As it is a very clear cut consensus on the matter, I am declining to restore the article and direct you to [[WP:DRV|deletion review]]. Thank you. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 14:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== Re: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ciel (Tsukihime) (2nd nomination)]] ==

Hi there. You closed this discussion as a keep, but didn't close out the co-nominated article (I know, it's like the only problem w/ Z-Man's script). Anyway, normally I'd close it out for you, but both DGG and I found the co-nom less notable than the main article, and I wanted to be sure that you meant to keep both. Take care, [[User:Xymmax|<b>Xymmax</b>]] [[User_talk:Xymmax|<small><sup>So let it be written</sup></small>]] [[Special:Contributions/Xymmax|<small><sub>So let it be done</sub></small>]] 17:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} - Same close as co-nom. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 17:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== Punkox ==

Simply drawing your attention to [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=256661788&oldid=256658542 my comment on the case].&mdash;[[User:Kww|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 18:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== Deletion of Matthew Gassen ==

I just want to know the reasons you found for taking the side of deletion, backed by guidelines, over the keep side, backed by policy. Hopefully, we can avoid more work at deletion review if you just answer me here. [[User:Tealwisp|Tealwisp]] ([[User talk:Tealwisp|talk]]) 18:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:Per [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew W. Gassen]] the community consensus is crystal clear as a delete. Among other things, citing IAR's status as a policy above all other guidelines is a rather unconvincing argument for keeping an article. I'm sorry, but from the discussion it is clear that the lack of coverage in reliable sources makes the subject ineligible for inclusion in Wikipedia. Do feel free to take this to [[WP:DRV]] as I am quite certain the consensus close is correct. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 18:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
::Just so we're clear, AfD is not a vote, correct? And the last time I checked, policy takes precedence over guidelines. I just want to know if this has all somehow changed, or if you have immunity for some reason. [[User:Tealwisp|Tealwisp]] ([[User talk:Tealwisp|talk]]) 21:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:::You are correct, [[WP:NOT#DEM|Wikipedia is not a democracy]]. Also, [[WP:BURO|Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy]]. When I close an AFD, I look at the strength of the arguments and the consensus of the community. It is not a vote and I did not base my close on a vote count. I based it on the arguments of sourcing and notability v. IAR and how that fits with the general beliefs of the community. And no, I am not immune from any of the [[WP:POLICY|rules]] on Wikipedia. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
::::I'd still like to know your rationale about taking guidelines over policy. [[User:Tealwisp|Tealwisp]] ([[User talk:Tealwisp|talk]]) 21:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::If you review opinions such as [[Wikipedia:Exceptions should leave the rule intact]], and [[Wikipedia:Wikilawyering]], and [[WP:BURO]], and [[Wikipedia:Use common sense]], that pretty much sums up the communal approach to things. Policies and Guidelines are rules to follow. But saying an article should be kept, when the sourcing and notability fail, merely because of IAR, is an untenable position. I should add the other consensus of the AFD was that the guidelines on notability and sourcing did not prevent the betterment of Wikipedia, which is the situation IAR is designed at. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enjoy the Ride (song) ==

I had previously merged the contents of that article into [[Dive Deep]], before the edit-warring broke out that forced it to AFD. I've restored that version of [[Dive Deep]], but now I'm uncomfortable about the GFDL and the history. The options I can come up with are to ignore the problem (certainly the simplest), or to bring "Enjoy the Ride" back as a protected redirect. Your choice.&mdash;[[User:Kww|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 02:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
:Protected redirect seems like the best option here. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
::Sounds good ... you've got the bit, not me. Thanks.&mdash;[[User:Kww|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 03:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
:::{{done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

== I don't really need it... ==

Just curious how to get [http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/User_compare.htm this] to work. What's the "key"..Secret key? Only for admins? (Found the link on your userpage:poor man's checkuser) -[[::User:Unpopular Opinion|Unpopular Opinion]]&nbsp;([[::User talk:Unpopular Opinion|talk]]&nbsp;'''·''' [[::Special:Contributions/Unpopular Opinion|contribs]]) 16:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
:[[User:Betacommand]] needs to give you a personalized key to make it work. Cheers. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 17:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks -[[::User:Unpopular Opinion|Unpopular Opinion]]&nbsp;([[::User talk:Unpopular Opinion|talk]]&nbsp;'''·''' [[::Special:Contributions/Unpopular Opinion|contribs]]) 17:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

== One is missed ==

One is not blocked yet. {{user|Show-me-the-evidence}}, the filer is likely a sock of {{User|Lucyintheskywithdada}} and admin, Ice Cold Beer who had been busy blocking socks last Saturday agreed with my opinion that show-me is Lucy.--[[User talk:Caspian blue|'''Caspian''' blue]] 02:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 02:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you for taking care of the sock farms.--[[User talk:Caspian blue|'''Caspian''' blue]] 03:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Mop jobs ==

Thanks much for giving me something to use my mop on, but I really feel compelled to spend my time reviewing copyediting style books and training copyeditors, on top of my usual WP maintenance. When that's done, I'll get the mop wet :) - Dan [[User:Dank55|Dank55]] ([[User talk:Dank55|send/receive]]) 03:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:No rush, took me months to get used to closing AFDs. And of course, there [[WP:DEADLINE|is no deadline]] [[Image:718smiley.png|15px]]. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of longest-lasting empires ==

Hi, you closed [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of longest-lasting empires]] only a minute after I submitted by "keep" rationale, and less than 4 days after it was nominated. I was wondering if you had actually considered my rationale, or felt the debate was eligible for early [[WP:SNOW|snowball]] deleting because of the lack of a keep argument after 3 1/2 days? Could you consider re-opening this and letting my keep argument get some consideration? [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 03:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:I'll re-open it for the balance of the time, but I don't see it changing, even based on your comment. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 03:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Ok, there were two more "keep" arguments which came after mine, no more "deletes" and no responses to the keep arguments from any of the original editors arguing for delete; how did you decide that there was still a consensus to delete? (I am also questioning two more closings separately below...) [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 22:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Of the three Keep comments, one cited ''It is a very useful list.'' as the entire rationale for Keeping the article. I weighted that comment very low in my final interpretation. DGG's comment states it is not OR, but qualifies that ordinarily the sources would be of higher quality. Your comment is very detailed and thorough, but at the end of the day, the weight of the Delete comments was stronger. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 22:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
::::But how did you decide that the weight of the delete comments were stronger than mine and DGG's? [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 23:12, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::Your argument was based in part on the existence and retention of [[List of empires]]; ''It is not original research unless the same information in List of empires is also original research'' and while you in good faith put forward that position and others such as being not indiscriminate, the delete comments put forward the opposing viewpoint in good faith and in greater quantity. And it was not a vote count, but a recognition that there was more support for the deletion arguments and less support for the diametrically opposite keep arguments. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 23:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::What you describe is the very essense of "no consensus". And [[WP:DEL|policy says we don't delete articles when there is no consensus]]. I fail to see much of a difference between a "vote count" and "greater quantity" or "more support"—more support for a position does not equal consensus, or even "rough consensus", which is determined with respect to policies and guidelines. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 23:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Feel free to take this to DRV, but I do not see any close other than delete. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 01:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::::[[WP:DRV#List of longest-lasting empires|I've done so]]. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 06:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== AfD of Surveillance and Incarceration ==

MBisanz, thank you for closing the AfD of that article. If you have a moment, could you also look at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Incarceration Rate, Military Spending, and Surveillance among the World Superpowers|this AfD]] for an article that was created as a duplicate of that first article? I was unable to speedy the article at first because the first AfD was unresolved, but now I image it can be either speedied under G4, or just deleted through the AfD. Thank you, &mdash;[[User:Politizer|Politizer]]&nbsp;<small><sup>'''[[User talk:Politizer|talk]]'''</sup></small>/<small><sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/Politizer|contribs]]'''</sub></small> 03:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{Done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 04:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you! I apologize for the length of comments you must have had to plod through when closing the first AfD....it should have been a pretty clear-cut discussion, on the verge of a SNOW, but a disruptive user was repeatedly socking so it made it hard to follow everything. Anyway, thank you for your work. &mdash;[[User:Politizer|Politizer]]&nbsp;<small><sup>'''[[User talk:Politizer|talk]]'''</sup></small>/<small><sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/Politizer|contribs]]'''</sub></small> 04:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Question about deletion ==

You deleted a category talk page, [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Category+talk%3APort+cities+and+towns+by+sea+or+ocean Category talk:Port cities and towns by sea or ocean], citing "CSD G6, non-controversial housekeeping deletion". Since this was a talk page of a category which is in use, I want to ask you what the actual content of this page and page history was. __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 09:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:There was one edit to the page, an IP asking people to send him a private message on a MMORPG game about useful websites and giving his account name at the MMORPG. Failed my advert, purpose of talk page, and releasing private data tests. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 09:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Very good. __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 10:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

===Template===
I was curious about {{tl|Miami-Dade County, Florida}} for the same reason, especially as that had a useful wikiproject banner rather than just graffiti. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 15:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:Actually, it had nothing on the page, it had been a blank page since July 17, 2007. There was no wikiproject banner on it. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 15:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

What happened [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Topics_related_to_Tourette_syndrome&action=edit here?] [[User:SandyGeorgia|Sandy<font color="green">Georgia</font>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:You had page blanked a nonsense post from an IP. I was going through and cleaning out such pages as they are rather useless to have laying around. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 15:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:: ah, ok, thanks, and sorry to trouble you :-) [[User:SandyGeorgia|Sandy<font color="green">Georgia</font>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::: No problem, anytime. :) '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 15:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Betacommand ==

My mistake was in still having his user page on my watchlist for some reason. He's one of the most arrogant characters I've run into here. He constantly gets blocked and learns nothing from it. However, I've taken his page off my watch list now, and I hope to never, ever have any contact with him again. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 16:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 16:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Objection ==

There is clearly an editorial dispute as to whether the transcripts in question fall into the limited exceptions which policy does allow outside of article space. I am particularly disappointed that you should choose to leap straight to a final warning during an editorial dispute. when no admin has issued a previous warning. I shall not re-add the material, because I no longer trust you to behave ethically on this matter. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 21:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Scott MacDonald ==

Are you issuing warnings on behalf of, or at the request of, or under the control of Scott MacDonald? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 21:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:I noticed first on my watchlist, where the page has been since it was created, and I am certainly not under the control of Scott MacDonald. Scott later mentioned it and I said I would not block anyone, but would investigate and act on my own accord, which I did. If I was acting on his behalf, I would have not warned, but acted otherwise. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Then you need to make a clear warning on the talk page (I suggest in the thread where the matter is being discussed) about your likely actions ''before'' you start dishing out '''final warnings to editors with whom you are in disagreement''' about the interpretation of policy. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 21:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Advice please ==

Hi Mbisanz, I've reverted [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Jason_(rocket)&diff=prev&oldid=255638796 this] and warned the person who added it for vandalism, but now having slight doubts cause I'm not a scientist. Would you agree it (reposted several times since May this year) is all just silly penis innuendo? 99% sure but still a bit worried I've been chasing a useful editor away. — [[User:Fireinacrowdedtheatre|<font color="FF3333" face="arial"><b>FIRE!</b></font>]][[User talk:Fireinacrowdedtheatre|<font color="000033" face="arial"><small><sup><i>in a crowded theatre...</i></sup></small></font>]] 21:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:It reads like total nonsense to me. And a google search of ''Tayness'' basically confirms that. I'd say take it to [[WP:AN/EW]] if he does it again. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

== List of fictional governments AfD ==

Could you explain your rationale for how you decided a consensus to delete [[List of fictional governments]] [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional governments|here]]? [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 22:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:Most of the Keep comments argued the general points of Lists v. Categories and the value of red-links. The Delete arguments more directly addressed the content of the article and on a whole were weightier than the Keep arguments. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 23:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
::Discounting the [[WP:JUSTAPOLICY|bare links to policy]] which don't explain how they apply to this article, and [[WP:ITSCRUFT|"it's cruft"]] arguments, we're left with the arguments that the list is too broad, a category is better, and lack of citation to reliable sources. All of these arguments were addressed by the keep arguments and by guidelines, respectively, [[WP:SALAT]] (overbroad lists are fixed by splitting, not deletion), [[WP:CLN]] (lists should not be deleted simply because a category exists or "is better"), and [[WP:BEFORE]] (which says that a good-faith effort to find sources should be attempted before an article is deleted). So how exactly do these arguments outweigh those arguments which directly refute them? [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 23:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry again, but the good faith arguments in favor of deletion, namely [[WP:NOT]] and the sourcing issues outweighed the good faith keep arguments. Also, the only delete comment with a discussion thread under it was the sourcing comment, so the delete comments were not directly refute. Please consider DRV if this is not satisfactory. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 01:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
::::[[WP:DRV#List of fictional governments|DRV here]]. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 06:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Ghostesses in the Slot Machine]] ==

Could you explain why you thought there was a consensus to delete the edit history of [[Ghostesses in the Slot Machine]], even after the [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghostesses in the Slot Machine|nominator eventually agreed with me]] that a merge would be appropriate? [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 22:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
:That was a mistake in closing (clicking the wrong button on the close window), I've fixed it. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 22:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks. I had incorrectly assumed this was a repeat of what happened with [[Imaginationland: The Movie]]. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] ([[User talk:DHowell|talk]]) 23:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
== Recreation of [[Paul Robinett‎]] ==

Hi. This article underwent AfD in October which you had closed as delete (a decision I disagreed with). It wasn't relisted in DRV (another decision that didn't seem to go with consensus). As I found two more in depth secondary sources, one published since the last deletion [http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zeitung/vermischtes/104881/index.php], I have recreated it. --[[User:Oakshade|Oakshade]] ([[User talk:Oakshade|talk]]) 23:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

== Please expand on a deletion reason ==

I just noticed this in my watchlist:
:''deleted "Template talk:Foreign exchange" ‎ (Deleted because "Speedy deleted per CSD G6, non-controversial housekeeping deletion. using TW". using TW)
Since [[Template:Foreign exchange]] exists, and I don't see a move in the history, I am a little puzzled. Do you know (or can you guess from the deleted content) what the underlying reason was: for a history merge perhaps? (Perhaps it was even a 'db' tag that I placed myself but no longer remember.)

--[[User:Hro%C3%B0ulf|Hroðulf]] (or Hrothulf) ([[User talk:Hro%C3%B0ulf|Talk]]) 02:22, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:It was a blank page that resulted from a rename of the template and the subsequent removal of the wikiproject category it was in. So it had no useful information or history to preserve and was just a blank page laying around. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 02:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Mike Caplan]] ==

In [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa Crabtree|this]] AfD, you have not yet deleted [[Mike Caplan]]. —<font color="green">[[User:Mythdon|Mythdon]]</font> (<font color="teal">[[User talk:Mythdon|talk]]</font> • <font color="teal">[[Special:Contributions/Mythdon|contribs]]</font>) 02:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{Done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks. —<font color="green">[[User:Mythdon|Mythdon]]</font> (<font color="teal">[[User talk:Mythdon|talk]]</font> • <font color="teal">[[Special:Contributions/Mythdon|contribs]]</font>) 03:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== Trouble with mirror articles.... ==

I see that the duplicate article [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/High School Musical: El desafio (Mexico)]] was deleted. But its twin still exists at [[High School Musical: El Desafio, Mexico]]. Do we need another AfD?? And if you can delete this mirror article based upon the results of the AfD, can I then move [[High School Musical: El Desafio, Argentina]] to [[High School Musical: El Desafio]] (as the film made more money in international distribution than simply in Argentina), and so simply overwrite the redirect currently at the preferred name? '''[[User:MichaelQSchmidt|<font color="blue">Schmidt,</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:MichaelQSchmidt|<b><sup><small>MICHAEL Q.</small></sup></b>]]'' 04:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:Ok, I think I did all of that. Right now? '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 04:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
::It was a confusing mess. And you did real good. Thanks big time! '''[[User:MichaelQSchmidt|<font color="blue">Schmidt,</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:MichaelQSchmidt|<b><sup><small>MICHAEL Q.</small></sup></b>]]'' 07:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FireGPG]] ==

Can you explain your rationale to merge FireGPG? I although I'm aware of silence and consensus, I'm worry that the decision was based only on the arguments of 3 users. Thanks, --[[User:Jmundo|Jmundo]] ([[User talk:Jmundo|talk]]) 05:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:Well there were five comments, the delete, the keep, and three merges. On my continuum of closings, which runs Keep, No Consensus, Merge, Redirect, Delete, I averaged the keep and delete to a merge since the Delete and two of the Merges argued lack of notability and you argued for the existence of notability. Also, the AFD opened Dec 7th, the last comment was Dec 8th, and I closed Dec 12th. Relisting for more consensus would have occurred if there was new information brought to light near the end of the AFD or if it appeared that commentors were confused about specific facts. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 10:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== AfD nomination of Holy Family Catholic Church (Williston, Florida) ==

I am more than a little confused. There are hundreds of individual church articles located within Wikipedia, in addition to similar stubs for schools and related items found in rural areas. In this case, the article deleted is responsible for servicing the majority of Catholics in the entire county...but is not considered noteworthy? It is stated it does not meet guidelines under [[WP:RS]], which I disagree with as numerous sourcing from the organizations own official website validate all material presented. I also would like to question whether the Inherent notability justification also applies, as if it does not then there is a clear conflict between the presence of similar articles throughout Wikipedia that have been present for years and the justification presented here. In addition, consensus did not occur after the relisting of the deletion request by those originally a part of the discussion unless I am misunderstanding the consensus. [[User:Aafm|Aafm]] ([[User talk:Aafm|talk]]) 07:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:[[WP:CONSENSUS|Consensus]] is a fickle thing. I've written 2 articles on churches from scratch personally. When I went to close this AFD, I mumbled to myself that the community was getting this decision wrong. Then I reminded myself that I was the closer, not a commentor at the AFD. Including the comments after the relisting, it seems several individuals disagree that the church is notable due to a lack of reliable sources. While primary sources can be used in some circumstances, third-party sources are generally required. Also, arguments such as other things exist or that there inherent notability, while good faith arguments, are generally discouraged with an encouragement to address specifically how the article in question meets the reliable sourcing guidelines to attain notability. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 10:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== AfD question ==

Hey MBisanz, since you do a lot of AfD's, I was wondering how you would have looked at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Z. Williamson|this]] particular one, given all the campaigning, SPAs and likely socks that came out. Thanks for the help, '''[[User:Grsz11|<font color="black">Grsz</font>]][[User talk:Grsz11|<b><font color="red"><sup>11</sup></font></b>]]''' 17:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:I would have closed as Keep. Even though there were a lot of SPAs and IPs on the page, there were a couple of experienced wikipedians who participated, all of whom said to keep the article. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 17:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
::Yep, those few are why I withdrew. Now as for the books, do they have enough notability to stand alone? '''[[User:Grsz11|<font color="black">Grsz</font>]][[User talk:Grsz11|<b><font color="red"><sup>11</sup></font></b>]]''' 18:03, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I don't know about the books. I rarely use group AFDs for that reason. One notable article in a group basically will prevent the deletion of any truly non-notable articles and bias any future AFDs. In particular, combining a Bio and Book is problematic, since they may bring different inclusion criteria into play. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 19:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glint (band)]] ==

Hi MBisanz. Might I ask for your rationale on this one? Unfortunately this AfD discussion was rife with chatter from an editor or editors with conflict of interest. But taking all of that out, I'm not sure if I see how the "delete" comments were enough to discount the "keep" comments written by me, by Michig, and by Esradekan? This looked like a "no consensus" to me, but admittedly I am biased here, given my opinion on the matter. :) Anyway, thanks in advance. <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 19:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
:Well once I down-weighted the 4comments from the same IP, and the comment from [[User:Glint (band)]] that left you, Michig, and Esradekan. Your comment was a strong comment in favor, but Michig and Esradekan's indicated they felt it barely met the inclusion standards. Combined with the otherwise strong deletion comments (not the nom though, which was weak), it tilted towards delete. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 19:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

:: I suspect that your "tilted towards delete" would justify a "no consensus" result in the minds of some admins who close AfDs, but I don't think this one warrants a DRV. Thanks very much for the explanation. <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 19:52, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Generally when I think of no consensus I think of situations where there is a near-perfect split over some process matter (eg. Delete per guideline [[WP:FICT]], Keep [[WP:FICT]] not a guideline) or when both sides are equally adamant over their [[WP:AGF]] belief on a concept and are present in equal weight. Out of interest, I ran the numbers, of the

:1,855 AFDs I have closed,
::139 were no consensus,
::1,172 were delete
::228 were keep
::154 were redirect
::137 were merge
::10 were speedy keep
::13 were speedy delete
::2 were speedy redirect
::1 was interwiki redirect

Resulting in:
:13 DRVs
::3 In progress
::7 Deletions endorsed
::1 Userfied
::1 Keep overturned
::1 Keep endorsed
::1 Deletion relisted

which works out to a a 99.7% accuracy rate, which I suspect is at least in the ballpark of success for most admins.'''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 20:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

: I think it is excellent that you are willing to examine your admin work in this sort of way. I also saw that you recently requested an editor review. I wish that more admins who wade into controversial areas would be as open to feedback and self-examination. It's very commendable. <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 21:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

:Your interpretation of "no consensus" appears to be original research that is inconsistent with the policy as I understand it. A "no consensus" outcome is appropriate even when there is a very uneven indication of views. When there are good arguments and strong cases on both sides of an AfD, and neither side makes a convincing enough argument that their conclusion is in the best interests of the encyclopedia, a no consensus is the correct outcome. A consensus is a consensus, not majority rule. [[User:ChildofMidnight|ChildofMidnight]] ([[User talk:ChildofMidnight|talk]]) 21:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

== AfD of Nixon Pryor Roundtree ==

Hi there. I saw you deleted the [[Nixon Pryor Roundtree]] article as result of [[Wikipedia:Articles for_deletion/Nixon Pryor Roundtree]] , but there were two additional articles bundled with the nom that were not deleted: [[Greatest Hits (Richie Rich album)]] & [[Richie Rich Presents - Grabs, Snatches %26 Takes]]. --[[User:Raven1977|Raven1977]] ([[User talk:Raven1977|talk]]) 00:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 04:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== The Red Coast deletion ==

MBisanz, in connection with [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Red Coat]], you may want to consider [[Sec tank]] and [[The Red Coat (comics)]]. This was mentioned at [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#deletion_rewquest_need_some_deletion]]. -- [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 09:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:Replied at AN. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 20:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
::Hi, [[The Red Coat (comics)]] is an exact copy (repost) of [[The Red Coat]]. (Not sure if it technically qualifies as a db-repost as it was posted ''before'' the original article was deleted, but it was certainly a duplicate.) And it is mentioned in the AfD. [[Special:Contributions/131.111.223.43|131.111.223.43]] ([[User talk:131.111.223.43|talk]]) 21:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:::{{done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boraskyniv]] ==

You've closed [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boraskyniv]] two days too early and I do not see a consensus to redirect the article. As it currently stands, there is more of a consensus to delete it. So this is not a [[WP:SNOWBALL]] case. Therefore, I'm requesting that you overturn your closing and allow the discussion to continue for the full length. --'''[[User:TheFarix|Farix]]''' ([[User talk:TheFarix|Talk]]) 13:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Up The Irons]] ==

Hello. You closed my above AfD nomination as delete, which I (obviously, given the discussion) have no objection to. However, I've been in contact with the article's creator ([[User:Uptheironsnc]]) during the discussion and he thinks he can improve and source it. I'm not entirely sure that it's sourceable, but I'd be happy to give him the opportunity to try - would you mind undeleting it to his userspace so he can have a go? Thanks in advance. ~ <font color="#228b22">[[User:Mazca|'''m'''a'''z'''c'''a''']]</font> <sup>[[User_talk:Mazca|'''t''']]|[[Special:Contributions/Mazca|'''c''']]</sup> 13:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
:{{done}} @ [[User:Uptheironsnc/UTI]]. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== Cartographers donating their work and a little time and effort to Wikimedia Commons ==

Dear Matthew

I would like to try and encourage cartographers to donate their maps to Wikimedia Commons.
I have recently donated the [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Stavanger_city_map.png Stavanger City Map]. I publish a new version on Wikimedia Commons each time there is an important update on the map, including a detailed comment with each new thumbnail. This enables users to have access to the latest material throughout the year. As well as assisting Wikipedia readers and potential travellers with a useful detailed map, there may in the long run be an historical significance here, or some other valuable element that may benefit both Wikimedia Commons, readers and researchers.

Is there any way in which you may be able to help me with this message to other cartographers?
Could the Stavanger City Map image be more prevalent so that it would be easier for other cartographers to see how simple it is to contribute their materiel to Wikimedia Commons and to the benefits of assisting others?

I would be grateful for any assistance or advice that you can offer me.

Thank you for all your wonderful work.

Best wishes from Norway,
--[[User:Kevinpaulscarrott|Kevinpaulscarrott]] ([[User talk:Kevinpaulscarrott|talk]]) 20:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

:{{done}} at [[User talk:Kevinpaulscarrott|User talk:Kevinpaulscarrott]] '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for your speedy and helpful reply. If you come across anything else that may be of benifit please feel free to assist.
Good luck with all your projects.
Best wishes,
--[[User:Kevinpaulscarrott|Kevinpaulscarrott]] ([[User talk:Kevinpaulscarrott|talk]]) 21:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

== Barnstar ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Admin_Barnstar.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Admin's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your excellent work in AFD. [[User:Schuym1|<span style="color:#0000f1">Schuy</span><span style="color:#00FFFF">m</span><span style="color:#FFBF00">1</span> <small>]]([[User talk:Schuym1|<font style="color:green">talk</font>]])</small> 01:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
|}

== Saab Lofton AFD result ==

Would you reconsider the result? There looks like a consensus to keep, only the nominator seems to disagree.--[[User:Rtphokie|Rtphokie]] ([[User talk:Rtphokie|talk]]) 01:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:Well a finding of '''No Consensus''' means that is no consensus to delete the article and therefore it is being kept. It is slightly less strong than a finding of '''Keep''', but given the few number of participants at the AFD and the large amount of dispute (primarily because of the nominator), I felt the no consensus closing was best since it retained the article while showing there was some amount of dispute that was difficult to parse as a closer. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

== GeoGroupTemplate ==

Thanks for protecting that. I had unwound the anon ip change but was still seeing the manifesto appear. Not sure why. [[User:Dmadeo|dm]] ([[User talk:Dmadeo|talk]]) 03:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
== Rationale ==

* {{On AFD|Ashida Kim|Ashida Kim (4th nomination)}}
So how does a lack of any reliable and independent sources, a problem that has been raised in no less than three AFD discussions over a period of more than three years now, and never refuted with actual independent reliable sources, get us a keep? A closing rationale is ''definitely'' needed here. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 03:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
*Basically people disagree over the notability of the subject. It split rather evenly and could have been a ''no consensus'' but the Keep comments were in good faith as were the Delete comments. I might suggest further stubbifying the whole "jimmy wales" section of the article though as a bit over the top. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 03:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
**In the closure, not here! &#9786; People can, the next time that this comes up (and it inevitably will), find it if it is in the closure. See how the 2nd and 3rd discussions were closed. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] ([[User talk:Uncle G|talk]]) 15:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

== Merge of Miley Cyrus song ==

You recently put a notice on the [[Breakout]] disambiguation's talk page regarding the result of a merger of a Miley Cyrus song to Breakout. I think you meant to put that on [[Breakout (album)]], which is the actual page that Miley Cyrus song should be merging with. Not a disambiguation page. --[[User:Wgungfu|Marty Goldberg]] ([[User talk:Wgungfu|talk]]) 08:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, a piped link messed up my close. I managed to fix the afdmergeto template, but missed the afdmergefrom template. Should be right now. Best. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 12:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

== Your AfD closes ==

I'd like to bring up a more general concern I have about your closes, Matthew. It appears that you routinely close AfDs before they have reached the five-day mark. The [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|relevant policy]] tells us the discussions are to last ''at least'' five days. Early closures are supposed to be the exception, such as a "snow" close. I know you are not the only one doing this, but I thought I'd begin with you to find out why this is happening, since, as I noted before, I've found you to be quite willing to communicate about your thinking. If you think the discussions do not usually need to last the full five days, why not try to gain consensus at [[WT:Deletion policy]] to change it to "at least four days"? <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 17:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:Paul, anytime, my early closes generally fall into 3 categories, each of which I do with a different rationale.

::1. Closes on days 1, 2, 3, or 4 - These are generally [[WP:SNOW]] closes. If I see a good number of users all saying that a certain outcome is going to be the result (good usually meaning more than 4) and no one saying otherwise, it is highly likely that that AFD will close as that result, if only because the longer an AFD goes on, the fewer people who comment. It runs more of a sliding scale as well. If I see 4 people on day 3, I am more likely to close early since I rarely see an AFD turn direction of days 4 or 5. If it is on day 1, I would usually look for 6 or 7 comments all in the same directions as an indicator.

::2. Closes on day 5 - The AFD clock resets 24 hours early for some reason. Meaning that some AFDs I may be closing at 4 days and 5 hours, 4 days and 10 hours, etc. Usually if I see an AFD is contentious (ie. there is active discussion still ongoing), I'll let it sit a bit longer. In most other cases however, it has not been edited for a day or two and it is unlikely anyone else will edit it before the full 120 hours have elapsed.

::3. Relists before day 10 - Yesterday, of the 150-180 AFDs due to close, 37 were relisted because of lack of comments. Usually these AFDs had 1-3 comments, including the nominator. If the comments were Delete, Delete, Delete and I relisted, and on the first day of the relist, there are two more Deletes, it is highly likely that by day 10 it will still be 5 Deletes. On the other hand, if the comments at the time of relist are Delete, Keep, and the first two comments in after relisting are Keep, Keep, it is likely that the nominator was mistaken or that the article has been changed over the first five days to a retainable point.

:Generally if my close is a type 1 and after closing someone asks me to re-open it to let it run through the full time, I do so since their objection negates the [[WP:SNOW]] rationale for closure. In closes of type 2 and type 3 I am less likely to re-open it if only because AFDs are already so undercommented on that closing once a visible consensus has settled in encourages people to comment on those AFDs remaining open. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 18:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

:: I appreciate you taking the time to explain. With all due respect, even with the elucidation I am finding this troubling. There are indeed good reasons at times to ignore policy, but it ought always be made clear at the time. For your type 1 early closes, it is important to say in the close rationale "WP:SNOW". It might be obvious to the regulars at AfD that this is the reason for the early close, but new editors, and even longtime editors who do not often get involved in deletion discussion, might not understand why the discussion is not proceeding as the policy lays out.
:: Your type 2 closes: these look very much like type 1 closes that occur on day 5. Your rationale appears to be a WP:SNOW rationale—or I am misunderstanding? You are saying essentially (with apologies for putting it strongly for rhetoric's sake), "I am going to ignore [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|our deletion policy]] because, based on my experience and judgment, this is heading towards an obvious 'delete' (or 'keep')."
:: I am sure that most of the time the result would be the same (in individual article cases); however, it is appearing to me that these day-five closes have become routine. (Is this based on "the AfD clock" problem? Is mathbot not functioning properly at [[WP:OAFD]]?) When discussions are routinely closed at 4.5 days, soon it is not unusual that they are routinely closed at 4.1 days. (In fact, this seems to be what has happened!) There are valid reasons for our policy saying "at least five days"—often time is required to locate sources (which can happen even after multiple people have !voted "delete"), some editors are active only on weekends, etc.
:: I am also concerned about the effects upon our deletion process as a whole when it is routinely admins who do not [[Wikipedia:Process is important|follow policy to the letter]] who are closing the bulk of the AfDs.
:: By the way, your type 3 closes appear fine to me.
:: I welcome your thoughts about this. <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 20:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

:::Well I can use [[WP:SNOW]] more often, as far as the clock problem, it if rather difficult to exactly figure out what is five days for an AFD, since they are all listed on the same page. [[User:Werdna]] is working on a software extension that should eliminate this problem by having MediaWiki calculate the time to close. Although I would be interested in your opinion on [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ISS toolbag]]. I closed it 8 hours early. Could you imagine any circumstance where there would be a different close? How could I better express such a close? Also to elaborate, I usually look at the sixth entry of [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Current_discussions]], which tells me there are 5 days before it. Looking at the fifth entry today, Dec 10th, I am looking at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canditv]]. Would that benefit from being open the full 120 hours? Would it be worth having another Keep on that AFD or directing someone to an AFD that has no comments yet? '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 20:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

:::: Okay, glad to hear that you are willing to expand a little when you close as per WP:SNOW. For the clock problem, yes I'm glad to hear that someone is looking to improve this—but is that not already the case at [[WP:OAFD]], where discussions are listed only after the ''full'' five days have passed? As for individual cases, yes it is true that the closer you get to the 120-hour mark the less likely it will be that a different consensus will emerge than the one that is already there in a particular discussion. But I would turn this question around: Usually there needs to be some strong reason to disregard policy (diregarding policy is usually an ''exceptional'' circumstance, not ''routine''), and the reasons you are presenting are in my view not all that compelling. That is particularly so for cases where a consensus to "delete" has emerged. Because notability usually hinges so much on the presence of sources, it is always possible that a late-hour discussant could present sources that completely turn the consensus around. [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth of July (band)|Here]] and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musical Starstreams|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish reggae|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Mulhern|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old Mill Inn & Spa|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balloon (band) (2nd nomination)|here]] are a few AfDs that I have been involved in, in which the consensus would have at first been appearing to head for "delete" but turned around once sources were provided. <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 05:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::Some interesting facts there. Four of the AFDs you managed to turn around in the first day or two and the remaining two you turned on day three, I've actually seen the rare AFD turn only after re-listing or on day 4. The other aspect to all of this is that (hyperbole warning) ''all'' admins tend to close early. Last night I was closing the Dec 10th run, which was four hours into the fifth day, and edit conflicted several times with two other admins also doing the closes. I can saw from the names I notice who have already closed AFDs by the time I get to a day's log, that there are probably a good dozen or more admins on a regular basis closing before the full 120 hour count. I understand you concern about policy, but let's flip it another way. If I can tell statistically ''an'' an admin will close an AFD early based on seeing the dozen or more names I know, and I also know that I have a rather high degree of accuracy in closing AFDs, why not close early and at least play off that level of accuracy? Yes, that is a bad argument, but I wanted to see the expression on your face when I made it. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 13:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::: Heh-heh. Well done. :) Anyway, it does trouble me that most AfDs are being closed by admins who are willing to operate out of the bounds of strict policy. Admins who believe it is important to follow the letter of the law are not being given the opportunity to close AfDs, as they are pretty much all closed by the 120-hour mark, most of the time! It's tough to know how much of a difference it makes, but there's a possibility (a real possibility, in my view) that things such as how consensus is determined in AfDs could end up being different, if other admins were given more opportunity to close discussions. [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_November_27&diff=254622635&oldid=254621816 This comment] has stuck with me, for example—the suggestion that admins currently closing AfDs don't follow [[Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators#Rough consensus|''those'' guidelines]] either! I'm not quite sure what to do with my concerns, however. So I started with MBisanz; lucky you. :) <font face="Comic sans MS">[[User:Paul Erik|Paul Erik]]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">[[User_talk:Paul Erik|(talk)]]</font><font color="Green">[[Special:Contributions/Paul Erik|(contribs)]]</font></sup></small> 17:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::::Paul it is interesting, as I have proposed a good number of things in my time here, some successful, some unsuccessful. Generally, when I am dealing with a group of people, changing the policy doesn't work, since there are so many people will just continue to ignore the policy. Basically the best change would be an infrastructure change. Possibly setting the AFD logs to half days instead of full days would discourage early closes. Also, pushing Werdna to finish the deletion discussion extension would help things. Finally, contesting closes where you think the extra time would make a difference is a great way to slowly bring things in line. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 17:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

== A fan of yours? ==

FYI, I noticed that [[User:Mbisanzisshatonbyacertaindogcalledfang]] had [http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mbisanzisshatonbyacertaindogcalledfang blanked your userpage], and, just as I was reaching for the [[WP:UAA|BatPhone]], the account was <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[:Template:Uw-uhblock|hardblocked]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. Good luck with the election and Happy Holidays. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 18:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:Election? Yea I saw that come through on my RC feed :) Thank for keeping the watch. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 18:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
::The "election" comment stemmed from a hasty misreading of your userpage. I'll amend it to wish you good luck on getting the ArbCom election results you're seeking, even though we're on opposite sides regarding [[User:SirFozzie|SirFozzie]]. :-) He's been far too willing to choose the [[appeal to emotion]] over [[WP:5P|core policies]] in my experience of him. --[[User:Ssbohio|SSB]]''[[User talk:Ssbohio|ohio]]'' 19:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Ahh ok. Don't worry, I disagreed with lots of people on candidates, even where I thought I would not. Happy editing. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 19:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

== This time of year again ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[image:wikisanta.jpg|150x100px|left]]

<font color="blue">'''[[User:Addshore|·Add§hore·]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Addshore|T<small>alk</small>]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Addshore|C<small>ont</small>]]</sub></font> is wishing you a [[Mary Poppins|Merry]] [[Christmas]]! This greeting (and season) promotes [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a [[Christmas|Merry Christmas]], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow! <br />

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{[[WP:SUBST|subst]]:[[User:Flaminglawyer/MerryChristmas!|User:Flaming/MC2008]]}} to their talk page with a friendly message. <font color="blue">'''[[User:Addshore|·Add§hore·]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Addshore|T<small>alk</small>]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Addshore|C<small>ont</small>]]</sub></font> 19:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
</div>

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suffolk Coastal Floaters Hang Gliding Club]] ==

there seems no consensus for merge...so wondering why you chose that path? Same with [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suffolk Coastal Floaters Hang Gliding Club]] the consensus seems clearly delete.[[User:Michellecrisp|Michellecrisp]] ([[User talk:Michellecrisp|talk]]) 23:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:I went on the convincingness of the argument that this non-notable organization was affiliated with a notable entity having an article and could be a plausible search engine term, taking into consideration that 50% of the articles on Wikipedia are redirects to other articles. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 23:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

== Image ==

Can you explain why this [[:Image:Tao-te-ching.png]] was deleted? I did not get any notifications about an imminent deletion. Please respond in my talk. Thanks. [[User:Jossi|≈ jossi ≈]] <small>[[User_talk:Jossi|(talk)]]</small> 02:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curdy]] ==

Hello, during this deletion talk, two other articles were added to the debate: [[Artur Balder]] and [[Curdy (character)]]. How should their fate be resolved? Best wishes; --[[User:Orland|Orland]] ([[User talk:Orland|talk]]) 13:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
:I've gone ahead and deleted them per the AFD. Thanks for pointing them out. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 14:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

== Articles for deletion/Devon & Somerset Gliding Club ==

I've not been on Wikipedia for sometime. I've come back to add more information to this article.
Unfortunately for reasons I DO understand it was recently redirected to Broadhembury.

Michellecrisp said "it has no real assertion of notability as a prominent club."
But they didn't expand on their reasoning, I can't see what that descision was based on.
I believe it does have notability as a prominent club, certainly in the South West as it's the largest club in that area with members from Yeovil, Barnstaple and Plymouth (60 miles away).

Totnesmartin said "all I could find on this was a single newpaper article and loads of mentions on directories, tourism sites etc."
There are several articles on the BBC website:
"A bird's eye view of Broadhembury"
"News - England - Glider crash inquiry starts", not a great example :(

There are several articles on the www.thisiswesternmorningnews.co.uk:
"Glider pilot Ron is flying high"
"Still sporty into their 90s"
"Flying free on the wings of dreams"

I'm sure there are more, just more time searching is all that is required!

Peterkingiron said "Merge to Broadhembury where the club is located (and presumably has an airfield for launching gliders). This is usually the best solution for articles of local facilities."
While that seems resonable, it's 2 miles away as the crow flies but by road it's nearer 5!
The club is located on a small airfield and not at Broadhembury

I would like to continue adding to the original article as time allows.
In your opinion, what is the minimum standard the article should meet to ensure it doesn't get deleted again?
Thanks
[[User:Hrf|hrf]] ([[User talk:Hrf|talk]]) 00:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
: The minimum standard an article must meet is the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]]. Any entity must have significant third party coverage for it to be a Wikipedia article. The 6 articles found [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Devon+and+Somerset+Gliding+Club%22&hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8 here] don't prove its notability. [[User:Michellecrisp|Michellecrisp]] ([[User talk:Michellecrisp|talk]]) 00:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

:I'm really not understanding you here. I closed the AFD as an uninvolved administrator. To have it re-created you would need to re-write it in your userspace and take it to [[WP:DRV]] to show teh community it now meets the inclusion standards. My opinion cannot overrule that of the community at AFD. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 02:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

== Flyff ==

You made Flyff redirect to the fly for fun page, but there is no fly for fun page, meaning you pretty much deleted Flyff...

(It shows up as nonexistent) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/72.213.164.232|72.213.164.232]] ([[User talk:72.213.164.232|talk]]) 01:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You are viewing it with a lag due to the squid server. The non-existent page should turn to a normal deleted redirect. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 02:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

== Congrats ==

Just wanted to make sure you didn't miss [[Mbisanz is terrible|this]]. Not very original yes, but it's always good to get concrete confirmation that you are doing your job well. Keep up the great job! <font color="#3300ff">[[User:Thingg|Thingg]]</font><sup><font color="#33ff00">[[User talk:Thingg|&#8853;]]</font></sup><sup><font color="#ff0033">[[Special:Contributions/Thingg|&#8855;]]</font></sup> 03:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I second that. There's nothing more fun than watching a ticked-off vandal make a fool of himself on a worldwide stage. Please do keep up the great job. --[[User:PMDrive1061|PMDrive1061]] ([[User talk:PMDrive1061|talk]]) 03:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

==AfD of ACB article==
I don't care enough to take this to DRV, but I'd like to point out that the [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008-2009 ACB season|half-completed close]] of the was both premature (the article is still little more than a random collection of facts) and done incorrectly. You neglected to finish the closure on the article page and dropped in a bunch of unrelated gibberish (something about a blocked user? probably a wrong template) in your closure explanation. You might want to clean it up a bit, [[User:MrZaius|<font color="Blue">'''MrZaius'''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:MrZaius|'''<font color="Blue">talk</font>''']]</sup> 09:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
:To clarify, I went ahead and finished your job at the article in question - Just don't want to edit your closure text in the actual AfD debate. [[User:MrZaius|<font color="Blue">'''MrZaius'''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:MrZaius|'''<font color="Blue">talk</font>''']]</sup> 09:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:21, 16 December 2008

Jew

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MBisanz&oldid=258331736"