User talk:Chaser/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chaser. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
 Archives |
|---|
| 2006: Mar—Jun 19 | Jun 20—Jul | Aug—Sep | Oct—Dec 17 | Dec 17—31 2007:
Jan | Feb—May |
Jun | Jul |
Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
Dear Sir, I was just searching for Mr. B's listing here on Wikipedia and saw that, although there was a listing for him, it was deleted by yourself. I believe the reason was that there was no rationale for his listing, as he was not notable. I must strongly disagree. He has created an entirely new genre of music, has been cited by most of the British (I am assuming/hoping your approach to 'notability' is not that of an American xenophobic) broadsheets on a regular basis, and truly stands out as an artist who is both extremely notable and unique in Chappist culture as well as broader musical and comedy circles. I petition for this listing to restored, as your findings as an editor are both incorrect and unfounded. Kindly revert as soon as possible. Yours Truly, Kevin Nicholas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.135.211.194 (talk) 06:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
- I can see no indication this person meets WP:MUSIC, so I will not restore the article.--Chaser (talk) 22:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Mr B.
Mr B, is an artist of serious rising fame in Britain. He has featured in several british newspapers including recently the Daily Telegraph. I add my voice to the petition to restore his article!
-O. Lean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.51.24 (talk) 07:09, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Mr B the gentleman rhymer
Hello,
I also petition for his listing to be restored. He is one of Britians top comedy circuit/musical performers using the Banjo ukulele as mentioned on the Banjo ukulele page. Also notable is that is real name is Jim Burke and was the Rapper/MC with Collapsed Lung which most notably had the Single "Eat My Goal" which was used on a Coca Cola television advert in England. He also performed this year at Glastonbury Festival on the Croissant Neuf stage. This coupled with the numerous british newspaper articles, radio appearances and web site reviews, I feel that this listing should be reinstated. I'm pretty new to wiki editing, but if this was put back up, I'm sure I could put a little effort into it myself.
All the best
P —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piperazine (talk • contribs) 23:15, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- Everyone keeps referring to newspaper coverage, but I can't find anything in any depth. See WP:MUSIC. What about these radio appearances?--Chaser (talk) 02:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply Chaser. I too am having difficulty finding the newspaper articles (I will keep searching). Here is a recent link to a clip of him performing on BBC radio's Steve Lamacq's show. As for WP:MUSIC, I do believe he could come under consideration for section 7 of that, and/or (being a comedian) section 2 of WP:ENTERTAINER perhaps, with 227,467 views of one of his you tube video since October 2009. Could he also be considered to come under section 3 of WP:ENTERTAINER with the reference to unique? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piperazine (talk • contribs) 06:39, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I have reversed my speedy deletion (a summary procedure for clear cases) because you all have raised enough doubt about whether this article is proper for speedy. I'm still not sure whether it meets WP:MUSIC. See the discussion page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. B The Gentleman Rhymer.--Chaser (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Spine.Cleaver
Hi, you unblocked user:Spine.Cleaver in order to change their username to something allowable, but there has been no change or as far as I can tell, any attempt. --Ari (talk) 04:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Mr. B radio plays
Hi,
You asked about radio appearances for Mr. B. The BBC Music pages have a list of artists, genres, etc and according to their list, Mr. B has appeared on or has been played on BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC 6 Music and BBC Radio Ulster. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/2ddb9772-e7e8-447f-8a79-506af75cb46f for full details.
I hope this information helps.
G 86.183.19.218 (talk) 13:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, man.
You were my edit-teacher guy, right? I barely remember you people.Green Kirby (talk) 07:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Please see my comments at the AFD and visit my rewrite of the article as currently held at User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/Obama Anak Menteng (film). Thank you, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Now in main space
Obama Anak Menteng (film) is the better and more easily sourced of the two, far less likely to ever be sent to AFD, and a merge/redirect to this newer article will preserve the contribution histories of the original. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking in. Best regards, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Two judges per week.
Greetings! At Wikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judges, we have bot-created thousands of articles on United States federal judges. Of those 1,272 currently still have their bot-made cleanup tag. If just a dozen editors will each commit to cleaning up just two of those articles every week, we will conquer the entire list within the year. Most of the articles are quick and easy to clean up, requiring only a few minor adjustments of bot-created awkward wording. Please consider joining this effort, and committing to cleaning up two judges per week for the year. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
You should know that this is yet another sock of Mario96 (talk · contribs). He's routinely blocked every few days for exactly the sort of thing he's now using the Joanna101 talk page to create. There's a reason the account was autoblocked. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 00:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks.--Chaser (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Substitutionary atonement
Hi, RE: Substitutionary atonement can you somehow freeze that title? It has played musical titles a few times now, and I think this is a good title, but the assoiciated articles (other views) have also been renamed etc. Time to stabilize them I think. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 08:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- See Talk:Substitutionary_atonement#Article_title. Thanks.--Chaser (talk) 15:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Block of ReaverFlash
Regarding the 48 hour block of this editor for edit-warring, I agree that the demand for a warning before an AN3 filing is silly. However, he did stop edit-warring once the issue was escalated to AN3. The purpose of a block is to stop the edit-warring, which self-correction seems to have (belatedly) done. So here's a compromise proposal. We unblock him and topic ban him from those two articles until the issue is resolved on talk. If he edits them before that point, then we re-block him for one week instead of the original 48 hours. What do you say?--Chaser (talk) 02:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- That's fine. Is there an ArbCom case that allows us to topic ban him? I thought there was some discussion not too long ago saying that topic bans were normally not within our discretion unless there was an ArbCom case to support them. But, either way, I don't mind if you do that. -- tariqabjotu 07:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the unblock, I'll hit you in the future if I need any pointers. Best wishes, ValenShephard (talk) 04:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Palestine Israel area
Hi, just a note as you left the template for the user Unicorn76, user appears to be continueing down the same path and has added undue and inflammatory claiims to the talkpage again, such as galloway supports terrorism and violence and so on, I have had a word on his talkpage and remove one of his comments but he has just replaced a similar one. Perhaps have a word or keep an eye on their contributions, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 13:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
User talk-Unicorn76
Did you examine the source of criticism he tendered for inclusion on Michael Moore? (diff) Please follow the link and read the article. [1] When I examined some of his earlier edits, it seemed obvious this guy is playing games with you all, in the style of Stephen Colbert. Wikispan (talk) 06:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding a past block/unblock - Talk:Villa del Cine
Perhaps I can interest you in following this discussion? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I hope this isn't an attempt to portray me in a negative light. ValenShephard (talk) 16:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- No it isn't-- a routine part of dispute resolution is to get third-party opinion. For all we know, I'm the one who is wrong here. More eyes on a situation can be helpful. As you can see, my post to Chaser is worded neutrally, and does not portray you in any negative light. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:21, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just saying, I don't want to clutter up Chaser's talk with outide issues, but your request was made at a contentious period of talk and has some tenous relation to my block. ValenShephard (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- The relation to your block is only that Chaser observed the efforts to resolve the dispute, and saw your attempts to improve your editing, and added helpful commentary to your talk towards that aim. Asking an editor to weigh in is nothing more than an attempt to bring more eyes to the situation-- in particular, the eyes of an editor who has been helpful to you in the past. You might recall that he advocated for your unblock, as he saw your editing improve, and he is likely to add helpful feedback. He is also likely to be an editor you trust-- you should be worried if I had asked the blocking editor to follow-- instead, I asked the unblocking editor, who advocated on your behalf, to follow. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I meant would Chaser be the ideal editor to involve, wouldn't an editor who has connection the article be a better input? But I get your reasoning now and accept it, Chaser's input would be useful indeed. ValenShephard (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- As an experienced editor, Chaser will understand that he is not being asked to weigh in on content disputes-- rather to help you understand ways to improve your editing-- that was the role he took in advocating for your unblock, so I do hope you'll trust his feedback. My concern remains that you have seen too many examples of less than exemplary editor behavior on the Chavez articles, and it is likely to be hard for you to sort, considering the examples you've been given. Another set of eyes will help ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, this is why I conceded that Chaser's input would be useful, when I realised it wasn't his input over content per se. Not to clutter even more, but I don't see similar behaviour on my part in relation to what other editors are doing. The contention came from me noting that you shouldn't over represent one of the sources you provided, which I probably mistakenly referred to as an oped, which happened to be a term used for different purposes on the Chavez article, where they seemed to be arguing against the inclusion of any sources they interpreted as opeds, while I was simply giving a heads up not to over represent it. This is because I had previously mentioned that most sources currently in the article were positive, and this source was pretty negative, so incorporating it into the article might lead to a loss of balance in weight. This isn't really an issue as we made it out to be due to a misunderstanding, you might not have wanted to include this particular article anyway. This probably isn't appropriate here and I have dragged it out, but maybe it would be useful for Chaser to see our issues elaborated in better wording, especially on my part. ValenShephard (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Valen, I think we're on the same page, but I need sleep !! 'Til tomorrow :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't think there are any issues really. I can see why it would be easy to think I was going along the same lines as what was happening on the Chavez article because of what you saw as accusations there, and when I appeared to say similar things elsewhere. (Sorry Chaser, for all this muddle : D) ValenShephard (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Valen, I think we're on the same page, but I need sleep !! 'Til tomorrow :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, this is why I conceded that Chaser's input would be useful, when I realised it wasn't his input over content per se. Not to clutter even more, but I don't see similar behaviour on my part in relation to what other editors are doing. The contention came from me noting that you shouldn't over represent one of the sources you provided, which I probably mistakenly referred to as an oped, which happened to be a term used for different purposes on the Chavez article, where they seemed to be arguing against the inclusion of any sources they interpreted as opeds, while I was simply giving a heads up not to over represent it. This is because I had previously mentioned that most sources currently in the article were positive, and this source was pretty negative, so incorporating it into the article might lead to a loss of balance in weight. This isn't really an issue as we made it out to be due to a misunderstanding, you might not have wanted to include this particular article anyway. This probably isn't appropriate here and I have dragged it out, but maybe it would be useful for Chaser to see our issues elaborated in better wording, especially on my part. ValenShephard (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- As an experienced editor, Chaser will understand that he is not being asked to weigh in on content disputes-- rather to help you understand ways to improve your editing-- that was the role he took in advocating for your unblock, so I do hope you'll trust his feedback. My concern remains that you have seen too many examples of less than exemplary editor behavior on the Chavez articles, and it is likely to be hard for you to sort, considering the examples you've been given. Another set of eyes will help ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I meant would Chaser be the ideal editor to involve, wouldn't an editor who has connection the article be a better input? But I get your reasoning now and accept it, Chaser's input would be useful indeed. ValenShephard (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- The relation to your block is only that Chaser observed the efforts to resolve the dispute, and saw your attempts to improve your editing, and added helpful commentary to your talk towards that aim. Asking an editor to weigh in is nothing more than an attempt to bring more eyes to the situation-- in particular, the eyes of an editor who has been helpful to you in the past. You might recall that he advocated for your unblock, as he saw your editing improve, and he is likely to add helpful feedback. He is also likely to be an editor you trust-- you should be worried if I had asked the blocking editor to follow-- instead, I asked the unblocking editor, who advocated on your behalf, to follow. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Just saying, I don't want to clutter up Chaser's talk with outide issues, but your request was made at a contentious period of talk and has some tenous relation to my block. ValenShephard (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- No it isn't-- a routine part of dispute resolution is to get third-party opinion. For all we know, I'm the one who is wrong here. More eyes on a situation can be helpful. As you can see, my post to Chaser is worded neutrally, and does not portray you in any negative light. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:21, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd be happy to, but it will have to wait until sometime tomorrow or Saturday.--Chaser (talk) 02:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- thanks ... prepare yourself for hours of reading. I don't seem to be making progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Chaser, this user seems intent on removing the indefinite block template and denied unblock request from his talk page; I notice you are the blocking admin, could you remove his talk page access please? Thanks in advance. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Some help
Hello Chaser, I want some advice from you. I don't want you to weigh into the discussion, but I am feeling threatened and attacked on a talk page. [2] A user is attacking my previous actions, which are not relevant to the issue and has made it clear he will canvas another user who had issues with me. I don't like being threatened with possible arbritation. For background, on the article itself, I have made, I think 2 reverts in the past 2-3 weeks. And deleted sections of the criticism section based on my edit summaries and the talk I linked you to. Initially, I was bold and deleted some of the criticism, then took my issue to talk when my changes were reverted. I didn't edit war, or try to push changes without explanation or discussion. ValenShephard (talk) 14:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Update: Sandy has mediated and the issue seems to have fizzled out. She wrote a brief message to the editor that arbitration was not the route to go down. ValenShephard (talk) 14:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
On another matter
This is exhausting, but your comment about me and SPI sparked my memory: see here. A Mattisse sock (Charles Rodriguez) showed up on Venezuelan film articles and another at other Venezuelan articles (Mark Weisbrot). ValenShephard created his account on April 30, 2010, and has now edited autism-related articles. Mattisse's MO was always to respond with "I just don't get it". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- What is this about, why is my name mentioned alongside sockpuppets? ValenShephard (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sandy, this is not my forte and I am not familiar with that editor. Please file an SPI if you're so inclined.--Chaser (talk) 01:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'll sleep on it (I've been wrong before :)-- thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Chaser, I don't like butting in on your talk page, but does this concern me? ValenShephard (talk) 01:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it does, but I will take it to your talk tomorrow if I'm still concerned. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Does this fit into you helping me? I would be happy to discuss any worries you have. ValenShephard (talk) 01:57, 13 September 2010(UTC)
- No, it's a significant wrinkle. I'll sleep on it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Does this fit into you helping me? I would be happy to discuss any worries you have. ValenShephard (talk) 01:57, 13 September 2010(UTC)
- Yes, it does, but I will take it to your talk tomorrow if I'm still concerned. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Chaser, I don't like butting in on your talk page, but does this concern me? ValenShephard (talk) 01:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'll sleep on it (I've been wrong before :)-- thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Almost identical. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sandy, if you think there is something amiss, why don't you go ahead with an investigation? Then we can both move on. ValenShephard (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
My name is Christopher Moriarty. Why did you delete me from wikipedia. Everything written was true. Tell me how to stay on the site please I need some tips. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.192.13.66 (talk) 01:34, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Biblio.com
I was going to create an article: Biblio.com and then I saw: 20:37, April 13, 2010 Chaser (talk | contribs) deleted "Biblio.com" (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content)) Can you tell me why you deleted this article? Is there some way I can see the article you created? GroveGuy (talk) 05:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
- WP:CSD#A7. I did not create that article. I have emailed you a copy of the revision before I deleted it.--Chaser (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
User:Chudasama
Please see User_talk:Chudasama#Progress_with_user and comment. Although if I adjust the block to allow the user to comment on his own talk page your PP may be superfluous, I want your input since you took admin action on the page. Thanks. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 19:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Rankin Fitch from Runaway Jury.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Rankin Fitch from Runaway Jury.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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Website Size and Crawling
What is the file size of the entire site? I know it measures in several terabytes, but I am considering starting a project where the entire site is archived multiple hard drives in a RAID 0 setup. I am also wondering who I would go to for requesting permission to crawl the site. My email is ( memaster3 at me dot com ) Thank you for your time, have a nice day! :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Memaster3 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Database_download. Follow-up questions should go to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).--Chaser (talk) 04:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
As the admin who previously blocked this editor for NPOV violations, I wonder if you might be willing to have a word with him about his editing over at Media Matters for America. He continues to make edits like this, this, this and this, despite lack of consensus on the talk page and being reverted by multiple editors (me + User:Xombi). Further, the edit he's making is to add Soros to the list of funders--a subject that is already explained in more detail a few sentences later in the article. He still doesn't seem to be getting NPOV. Yilloslime TC 19:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
No I discussed refrences on the talk page add to the fact footnote 19 proves Soros is funding.
Whats the problem? There is a consensus.I notice those reverting the post do not put any reason to refute on the talk page. they have to provide a reason.Unicorn76 (talk) 20:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- There's hardly a consensus. Including Soros in the list without qualifiers is simplistic. That being said, at least Unicorn76 is discussing it. I think RolandR and Drrll proposed a good solution here. Now all we need is someone to implement it.--Chaser (talk) 01:15, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, he's readded it yet again, this time after being reverted by a third different editor. It's true that he is indeed discussing it on the talk page, though this basically involves him repeating arguments which have already been rejected.Yilloslime TC 14:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I am requesting you put a 3RR warning on the other poster on the current conflict. He has done the 3RR, if he is given a pass I can only assume the double standard I posted has been confirmed. wikiepdia is not suppose to favor people for PC reasons but this is obviosly what is happening. The other poster has demonstrated racism against Jews.Unicorn76 (talk) 12:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
ITN
Hey Chaser. Just a reminder—make sure you reset the timer when you post an item on ITN. Thanks. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks HJM. Pardon me for forgetting and thanks for taking care of it this time.--Chaser (talk) 16:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Can you take a look there when you get a chance. Thanks. --John (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Checkuser from MuZemike
I defer to your judgement on this. Since this had already come up, I've dropped a pointer at User talk:DGG#About the Jennifer Chang Afd. Uncle G (talk) 01:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- I am considering closing the discussion. It has run for the full 7 day period at this point, and can be closed roughly in-process. Any objections? Uncle G (talk) 11:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- None.--Chaser (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- It just meant "approximately". Uncle G (talk) 23:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Why was this page deleted?
BiblioWorks is a US 501c(3) non-profit and a registered NGO in Bolivia that works in partnership with both the Bolivian national government and the US embassy to build public libraries in rural communities (7 and counting). Could you please restore this article and/or provide further explanation as to why it has been removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.147.222.45 (talk) 16:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- Because the article failed to assert the notability of its subject. For more on that issue, see WP:GROUP, which is the most applicable notability guideline. I happened to notice it through this conversation, but the reason I deleted it is that there was no assertion to notability.--Chaser (talk) 18:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)