User talk:Juliancolton/Archive 16

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Juliancolton. 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 10

←

Archive 14

→

Request: please fix a couple cut & paste moves

Buaidh's doing a great job editing outlines and other articles. Though it appears that he doesn't know how to make moves yet, and may need some guidance. Have you seen his contribs lately? He's been doing an incredible amount of work on the outlines. I'm thoroughly impressed.

I ran into just a couple pages that need their edit histories restored.

The edit history for Outline of the District of Columbia is in Index of Washington, D.C.-related articles. And the edit history for Index of Washington, D.C.-related articles is in List of Washington, D.C.-related topics.

To fix this, please:

speedy delete Outline of the District of Columbia
move Index of Washington, D.C.-related articles to Outline of the District of Columbia, and then revert the page back to my last edit.
move List of Washington, D.C.-related topics to Index of Washington, D.C.-related articles

You might want to look over Buaidh's contribs to see if there are any other cut and paste moves to clean up, and drop him a note explaining the correct way to make moves. And maybe mention your opinion of his work on the Outline of knowledge project. ;)

Thank you!

The Transhumanist 00:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. Thank you. The Transhumanist 00:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Usurpation

I don't really know, I have been trying to find a username that I really like. This is my final one-I mean it!! I really like this name so I won't change after this, ever! --Ir di ce nt 23 00:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Note- I posted this on the main page too.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fruitland Primary School

Can you please do me a favour and protect the re-direct? That's why we had to go to AfD because cretor won't respect the re-direct. I'd do it, but I have been involved, to say the least. StarM 01:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, especially since I'll be offline this weekend. Speaking of sprotect since in your anti-vandal work you may know more than I did - I extended the sprotection on my talk because it was going to expire while I'm out of town and don't want anyone to deal with the mess that was going on yesterday. Did I do it right? I've gone from unprotected to protected but never changing a protection. Thanks! StarM 01:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, THANKS! StarM 01:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't do that please

Dude do not edit comments that were made by another user like you did to User:EVula at WP:CHU. It's unacceptable. Thanks. Caden ^{is cool} 05:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I fixed a typo so the template would work properly. That's perfectly acceptable. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Road mileage and Reliable sources

Hi Julian, Cherry Springs State Park is about ready for FAC, but I have a question about road mileage and reliable sources that I thought you might know the answer to. The park is on Pennsylvania Route 44 and there is a note in the article about its predecessor, Cherry Springs Scenic Drive, which was 6.5 miles long when established in 1922. Someone else has noted that using the website mapmyrun.com the distance from Patterson State Park (north of the park on PA 44) to the Cherry Springs vista (south of the park on PA 44) is also 6.5 miles. DO you know if this website is considered a WP:RS? If not, are there any such distance tools that are a RS? I seem to recall seeing this kind of thing in some road articles, but can't find it now. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks very much, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Given your recent post at User Talk:CadenS, you might find the {{talkback}} template useful. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 16:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

J. J. Johnson (wide receiver)

Did you respond to the protection request for the wrong page? You said fully protected - indef (it's not and doesn't seem to need it). --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 20:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I see that now. I thought that was weird! --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 20:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Blooking, and blooking

Why dont you give a chance to new unexperienced editors, or give then a warning,or help then. --Juliaaltagracia (talk) 02:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism paging system.

This is designed as a (somewhat rudimentary) way to alert ME of high levels of vandalism.--Michael (Talk) 05:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

new DRV log pages

Hi, I just wanted to remind you to subst: the {{SUBPAGENAME}} when creating the new log pages; otherwise it shows the name of whatever page it's transcluded to. For example, the May 2 page header was appearing as "Deletion review" on the main Deletion review page, but as "Active" at WP:Deletion review/Active. I've fixed it now. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Your user talk page

Since your user talk page is protected, wouldn't it be a good idea to have an unprotected talk page, like User talk:J.delanoy/unprotectedtalk, in case IP addresses need to talk to you? GT5162 ^{(我的对话页)} 12:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

You recently deleted the following page: Bristol Hospital Broadcasting Service.

It would appear to have been deleted due to the radio station broadcasting on a closed circuit. With potential listeners of up to 8,000 at anytime and with a high turnover of listeners this organisation has been heard by thousands of people over the past 56+ years. Even if you ignore the fact that it is a radio station, it is still a long established and respected charity.

Are you proposing to remove all closed circuit radio stations?

If you are not willing to reconsider your decision then could you please change our link to our website address similar to other hospital radio stations.

Our address is bhbs.org

Regards

Jonny Jonny Rogan (talk) 19:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmph!

Spoiled sport! :P - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 01:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Username report

Hello, my report on User: Giusd22 was declined because you said there was nothing wrong with using your real name. I understand that, but that isn't why it was reported. It was reported because the name and user page are advertising him and his career as a scholar.--gordonrox24 (talk) 01:29, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok Thanks!--gordonrox24 (talk) 01:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

if you have a moment for a random examination of an AfD and a corresponding TemplateTalk

Hi Hi, i saw your funny exchange of comments about SeriousHuggleLolz[1], and that led me to discover you are happy about being an Inclusionist Wikipedian. So i hope i can ask you a favor, as i am philosophically very much eager to be an inclusionist and openmindedly accepting of viewpoints which are not in harmony with my own personal POV. There is an AfD discussion where i have made my very first ever endorsement to delete. But no matter how much i offered to do the Article Creator's work for them, looking for RS, attempting to find WP:V of sufficient secondary sources, and volunteering to summarize/ merge/ retain all useful data and avoid original research because i abhor deletion of any possibly useful information, the Article Creator still just blows me off as a senile decrepit geezer whose "mindset from a different century" renders me "too ignorant to understand" the nuances of the situation. Ironically, the article is about Unlabeled sexual orientation, and the Article Creator already lost a deletion dispute on this under different titles, then they tried to do an end-run around our suggested guidelines by attempting to change the very template[2] which helps us to sort and categorize and deal with labels which don't fit into rigid old-fashioned pigeonholes. After a couple days of repeatedly offering to "write for the enemy" despite my own personal POV being totally disjunct from his, he just keeps replying snarkily to every suggestion of how to meet the minimums of WP:GNG with WP:RS which we WP:V for his benefit. I even added sources into the discussion in an attempt to support his viewpoint, demonstrating my willingness to read and write outside of my own POV. Now my head has exploded (or he's kicked it ten times too many, either way) and i can't help him any further. You look like a very cool-as-a-cucumber level-headed inclusionist who could potentially handle the chores of either 1) doing his "heavy lifting" and converting his POV_fork stub into a real article, or 2) gently cushioning the deletion by gathering the appropriate pieces of shrapnel and polishing them up for safekeeping in other more appropriate places. If you are too busy, i totally will understand that you wouldn't want to "do somebody else's dirty work". But if you have an inclination to use your Inclusion~Magic then maybe you can accomplish the tasks i failed to achieve. I hate to see a newbie-ish user's contributions destroyed without at least trying to salvage the essential scraps. Thank you so very much for taking a moment to look at that AfD and TemplateTalk. ~_{Teledildonix314}~^Talk~_4-1-1~ 02:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this:

Wow that was fast! Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Well done! I was just about to revert them myself, but you beat me to it. You're fast. --Sky Attacker (talk) 03:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

What's going on, Julian? Drmies (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Just some trolls, methinks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I suggest protecting your own user talk page.--Sky Attacker (talk) 04:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'd rather have them vandalize my talk page than an actual article. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/129.2.175.70, this is bigger than you think. Momo san ^Gespräch 04:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for protecting my talk... - Wysprgr2005 (talk) 04:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Julian,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Hurricane Isabel eye from ISS (edit 1).jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 18, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-09-18. howcheng {chat} 04:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks! --NorwegianBlue^talk 17:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't abuse rollback or he will take it back. Just tellin' -PirateSmackK (talk) 17:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Please explain

So far this month, you have given me no carrots!!!!--The Carrot-Eating Horse (talk) 20:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion deadline coming up

Mind putting this on your list to delete? No proof of free license will be found, since it comes from the Ill state legislature, which is not inherently PD. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 04:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XV

Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 08:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

FC de Rakt

Greetings Julian, you deleted FC de Rakt per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FC de Rakt (2nd nomination) a short while ago, but that title has since been redirected to an article containing information about the topic. As this is effectively a merge, would you mind restoring the deleted history of the article so that any useful content/references can be retrieved for the target? Mahalo, Skomorokh 12:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response, I appreciate it. Regards, Skomorokh 13:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craigslist controversies and illegal activities by users

Viriditas, who created the article, seems to believe your closing comment on the AfD prohibits putting proposed merge tags on the article and starting a discussion about it on the talk page. That reading strikes me as impossible and I read it as the opposite; that you left it to editors to propose a merge and discuss it on the talk page, but were opposing someone being bold and actually merging without proposing or discussing and establishing consensus, which I agree would be as bad an idea to do as taking the section out of Craigslist and making it a separate article was in the first place. I placed merge tags on these two articles and began a discussion on the Craigslist talk page, but Viriditas has removed the tags. I don't think it would be productive for me to put them back; it seems asking for clarification from you is what's appropriate here. Шизомби (talk) 13:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! If there is a problem with the merge proposal tags being removed, what would you recommend? Шизомби (talk) 14:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey she is very lovely, please put it back! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abishell (talk • contribs) 19:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Was I too hasty here?

Hello. I just closed this AfD debate as a speedy-keep (and non-admin closure) since it seemed to me that it was actually a proposed merge, which doesn't belong at AfD (per, among other places, the first numbered point of WP:Speedy Keep). However, my decision has since been criticised by two editors (here and here), which leads me to doubt myself a little. Since I've seen you at AfD a lot, and obviously I'm eager not to repeat any mistake I may have made, I thought I'd ask your opinion: did I do something wrong? If so, what have I misunderstood about WP:Speedy Keep? Many thanks, Olaf Davis (talk) 21:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Advice for RfA

I'm considering closing my RfA early due to the oppose !votes. Any suggestions? -down load ׀ sign! 00:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at Download's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi

I replied to you on my talk page. Caden ^{is cool} 08:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment

Maybe this is an unusual ping but since you were the closing admin on the recent Craigslist controversies and illegal activities by users I'd nominated for AfD, I was wondering if you'd be at all interested in providing us input at a sort of related article, Internet homicide. Currently there's a proposal on the table submitted by User:Ludwigs2 that would sort of refocus the topic in the interest of avoiding unacceptable "OR"/SYNTH/&c., which is posted on this article's talkpage here: Talk:Internet_homicide#alternate proposal. If you would happen to be have a spare moment to check it out and comment, we'd greatly appreciate it. In either case: cheers! ↜Just M E here , now 17:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; and some questions

Thanks for setting me up with rollback. I have some questions about how to communicate with users about their removed edits. I notice that some editors place warnings on the talk pages of users whose pages have been rolled back (rollbacked?), but can't find a way to do that. Some rollback methods (e.g., Twinkle) seem to claim to be doing this automatically (reporting that they are opening rolled back the user's talk page), but I never see any changes actually made there. Is there a way to automate making a note on rollbacked users' talk pages that I'm missing? Thanks! — Aldaron • T/C 03:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Do those templates get automatically inserted by Twinkle? The documentation seems to suggest that they do, but I don't see it happening. — Aldaron • T/C 04:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Weird, thats not how it behaves for me. Twinkle reports "Info: Opening user talk page edit form for user ...", but then goes on to complete the rollback after which it navigates to the article page. There's never an opportunity to do anything on the user's page. Bug? Or am I missing something. (Thanks for your patience.) — Aldaron • T/C 05:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Figured it out: I was blocking popups. My fault. It works now as you described. One further question though. All the pages I rollback are being added to my watchlist, even though I don't have the "add pages I edit to watch list" option checked in my preferences. Is there a Twinkle setting (that I can change) that's doing that? — Aldaron • T/C 13:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Closure candidates at AfD for you

thanks, Enigma^msg 23:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

How about Kid Springs now? Enigma^msg 19:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Admin coaching

Hi, i was wondering if you are still coaching, and have any spare capacity? I'll copy my statement from the request for coaching page below, as it seems pretty defunct. Basically, i think i would do ok at an RfA, having asked a few ppl that contribute there a lot, but i don't want to self nom. Admin coaching seems a good way to make sure i am not missing important areas of experience, and to get an indepth look at my contribs, hopefully leading to a nomination. Thanks either way!

Also, could i get rollback? I can already do it using twinkle, but i wanted to rmv that to see if it is causing some page load problem (one of the sctipts is giving me some kind of problem), and getting it officially would show i can use it sensiblyYob Mod 10:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Statement: " After more than a year and 11,000 edits, i'm thinking that expanding my involvment would be nice. In addition to creating Good and Featured content, i've contributed to many AfDs (and other XfDs) and WP:FEED and GA and FL/FT reviewing, so adminship seems the logical next step. My article contribs are mostly wikignoming random articles interspersed with bigger projects on science fiction or LGBT articles, and i often hit obstacles that require me finding an admin (eg speedy deleting blatant vandalism, move-backs, closing AfD with merge consensus so i can get on with the merge), particularly as most of the pages i work on are pretty ignored, so getting admin involment can be a chore. Never been reported to ANI or and notice-boards or had a single civility complaint. Not sure how much coaching i will need, but definitly an indepth look at my contribs and guidance over the next months, leading up to a RfA nomination (i really don't want to do a self-nom if i am unknowingly doing things wrongly. Thanks!)"

Hey hey, vielen Dank @ Rollback. I did my first recent changes patrolling with it :-). I thought there would be more to do there though, considering all the talk about vandalism - i found only 3 in about 30 mins that hadn't been reverted before i got there! But useful none the less.

YobMod 07:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Re: [3], muchas gracias. (Nuggetboy) (talk) (contribs) 15:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

RFPP

Thanks for the solid! :-) John Sloan @ 19:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

NPWatcher

Hi! Not to be a bother or pain, but the NPWatcher permission page currently has 5 people waiting for a response. Can you please give responses, since you have in the past? Thanks! Andrewrp^Tally-ho! 00:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Hurricane Luis article has bad grammar and substandard editing

We, the UWEC Students operating this school address are here to tell you about the fact that Hurricane Luis has bad grammar, dubious claims and unsourced materials on there. Our students here at the UWEC are on weather which is among our many class tasks for this school here; we cannot have students studying material with unsourced/dubious claims, bad grammar and improper editing. How must Hurricane Luis get cleaned up/properly revamped so that the Hurricane Luis article can be appropriate for our school students to study for class task?

Somebody wrote an unsourced claim that ninety-eight foot waves battered the East Coast of the United States and sank the ship of Queen Elizabeth 2-could you please get something done about these substandard edits and unsourced claims? 173.26.80.178 (talk) 01:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion

Juliancolton, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Gaia Octavia Agrippa^Talk | _Sign 20:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Barnstar

		The Swine Flu Barnstar
		For your extraordinary efforts in keeping 2009 swine flu outbreak and 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States up to date and for your contributions to the talk pages, I hereby award you this special barnstar. Congratulations and keep up the good work! ThaddeusB (talk) 20:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Move request: Lists of Croats to List of Croats

I'd like to revert a move I made...

Please move Lists of Croats to "List of Croats".

(The entries on the page aren't lists, which makes the current title misleading.)

The Transhumanist 21:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Move request: Lists of English people to List of English people

Here's another one...

Please move Lists of English people to "List of English people".

(The entries on the page aren't lists, which makes the current title misleading.)

The Transhumanist 21:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Move request: Lists of Irish Americans to List of Irish Americans

The Transhumanist 21:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Move request: Lists of United Arab Emiratis to List of United Arab Emiratis

The Transhumanist 22:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Just in case you haven't had had had had had had had had had had had enough...

I'm hoping to keep the conversation about this article active and avoid the usual fleeing from a topic that takes place after an AfD has closed. There was much talk about merging this article but little agreement on where to merge it to. Therefore I am informing everyone who participated in the debate of the ongoing conversation here in order to bring this matter to a close sometime in our lifetimes. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome onboard. I am familiar with your quality of work and it will be a great addition to the GA sweeps team. Please follow this sweeps process so that the format and layout will be consistent throughout all articles reviewed by different editors. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've read through those instructions, and I feel pretty confident that I won't break anything. I'm a bit unclear on how articles become exempt, though. Do you know of a page that explains this in detail? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for signing up. Exempt articles include articles that are currently FAs (I went through the list and found all current FAs yesterday, so you likely won't run into any of those unless new ones pass), articles that have been deleted/merged, or articles that are currently at GAR, or were previously delisted. If you run into any of these, remove them from the worklist, and list them under your running total. Let me know if you need further clarification. Thanks again for helping out! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

DeMatha High School

Whoa!! This school is not hoax nor too small to have a page. It is been around for more than 50 years and has a quite a few notable alumni (plus Hall of Fame High School basketball coach Morgan Wootten). Please restore this page... and when was there a PROD on it. Thanks MDfoo (talk) 11:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened, but see http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=DeMatha+Catholic+High+School MDfoo (talk) 14:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see then. I had DeMatha on my watchlist, but WP:PROD didn't show up, or else I didn't see it. MDfoo (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

That would be better than nothing. It needs some kind of review before being deleted. Was there a discussion on the PROD? MDfoo (talk) 14:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Looking at the history log, it seems that IP 96.255.93.112 added a PROD with a date older than 7 days. Just a few hours later it was deleted. MDfoo (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey juliancolton- can you restore the talk page too? tedder (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You & me

Julian, any good editor is compelled to consider their actions if others seem to find fault. I consider myself a good editor (said with humor;regardless of your opinion :)) so I feel compelled to consider my actions.

In our recent disagreement, it is apparent to me that you were looking for more clarification on my position as to deleting One trillion (basketball). Two editors suggested merge, two (including me) suggested delete. You were wanting to close the AfD, and with the limited participation you probably felt you needed more from me to help reach a conclusion. I can understand that. My comments probably weren't as clear as necessary for some people (and by some people I don't mean they are lesser people, just people). At the time you made your comment to me, the AfD was open. I was not aware you were attempting to close the AfD. Now that I know that was the case, this sheds more light.

I did explain in my initial response to you that it was self evident the term was a neologism. We've deleted a bazillion of these around here. See Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms, which generally discourages articles for such terms ("In many cases, articles on neologisms get deleted"). I thought my response to you explaining that it was a neologism should have been sufficient, given that you've been an administrator for quite some time now. Still, perhaps it was unreasonable of me to expect since one person can't know everything.

I think at this point we were having an amicable disagreement. You were in one viewpoint, I was in another, and our views weren't quite working together.

I became rather irritated with you when you suggested I should stop commenting unless I did as you requested. My edits are and have always been in good faith, and I felt I had explained myself sufficiently. To be taken to task over this simple thing when I had explained I felt it was a neologism, and when my prior behavior at XfD has been perfectly in line with every guideline and policy... I'll admit it rankled me. Frankly, I was astonished when it suddenly elevated to the level of being taken before WP:WQA. At that point, I wasn't upset anymore. Astonished, but not upset.

I hope this clarifies things and irons out our differences. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the response; I appreciate that you've taken the time to explain your actions. I admit that perhaps I should have been less snarky in my comments on your talk page, so for that I apologise. With regards to the WQA thread, I had no intentions of having action taken against you. Rather, I was looking for third opinions, before our disagreement was blown out of proportion.

See you 'round the wiki. :) Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I won't accept your apology because none is necessary :). We had a misunderstanding, that's all. It happens. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Re:Barnstar

Thanks. Dough4872 (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Canvassing

It's not like Either way ain't guilty of doing it himself. He appears to be canvassing support of him via email (because we would see it if he was doing it here). By using email, he's being more discreet. FMAFan1990 (talk) 19:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

That's ridiculous, the unfounded email accusation, and makes me think you are unable to look within to find the problem. It's always something external, isn't it? Never you? Binksternet (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, please don't accuse me of things. You complain about me not assuming good faith, but I keep getting comments like that made about me. Of the people who have commented at my RFC (in my "support"), I have only had interactions (at least in a major form as far as I can tell) with Daniel and Julian. I did not know of several of the editors until they commented there. either way (talk) 23:15, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit Stats at RfA

Thank you. I for one prefer the stats on talk to having to run tool server. In the future, who would I ask to post that when it is missing? --Preceding unsigned comment 20:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

There was a bot doing that but it is AWOL, so we all rely on Juliancolton to do it. If I recall correctly, I have never seen anyone else adding those stats apart from him. Everyone else (myself included) just waits for JC to do it =) But you can do so as well if you notice them missing ;-) So Why 20:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, true. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bump (song)

Actually, the result was "redirect and protect". Look at the history of undoing redirects in the article, and I think it's apparent that protection is required. —Kww(talk) 21:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

An MfD and WP:USER

I'm curious why in the above linked MfD, you went against the above linked guideline?--Rockfang (talk) 23:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I kinda figured that would be the answer. I just wanted to make sure. I just wish either the guideline was more specific and followed, or that section was taken out completely. It seems kinda rare that section is ever sucessfully "used" at an MfD.--Rockfang (talk) 03:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Practical Metaphysics

Hi Juliancolton

I note that you closed the above-captioned as keep. The consensus was not keep, but merge, which is a permissible way to close an AfD debate per Wikipedia:Deletion process#Process. Please amend your closure to reflect what people actually opined.

Regards, Bongo matic 00:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.

Merge results default to keep, and I already noted the consensus to merge in my closing statement, so I feel it's already sufficient. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:47, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you did not note that there was a consensus to merge, either at the AfD or the article's talk page. Rather, you stated (at the AfD) that a discussion to merge should occur at the article's talk page, and noted only "keep" at the talk page. This is precisely the point I was raising. Yes, the default is "keep", but the process specifically contemplates "merge" as a result, and there are even templates for reflecting these consensus outcomes.

Having acknowledged (in your message to me) that "merge" is the consensus, it is incumbent upon you to follow the procedure.

Regards, Bongo matic 00:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.

Fair enough, done. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but actually I meant the entire machinery discussed at the deletion process page:

- If the decision is to merge, use {{Afd-mergeto}} and {{Afd-mergefrom}} to mark the AfD'd page and merge target talk page (respectively):
  {{afd-mergeto|destination article|debate name|debate closure date}}
  {{afd-mergefrom|nominated article|debate name|debate closure date}}

Regards, Bongo matic 01:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

There was on outright consensus to merge, though. A few users agreed; thus, I closed it as keep, with emphasis on a potential merge. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Download's RfA

Hi, I noticed your comment concerning this at Download's RfA. Are you aware of this which encourages the placing of the heart on user pages? I don't think it is intended to harm (although it could be argued to be spamming) and I have one myself actually. But I was wondering what you thought of it in case you hadn't realised this before? --can dle •wicke 01:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Glad to assist. Having seen it around before I didn't want Download getting any unnecessary trouble for it as I am sure it is a more rampant craze. --can dle •wicke 01:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for that i appreciate it.-- Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me} ^Guestbook ^{Hate Comments} 02:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The/a

Julian, although the Internet desperately needs a tutorial on this difficult aspect of English grammar for non-native speakers, my tute you've linked to is in a very early state, and I'm concerned it might be misleading. I haven't properly worked out how to structure it, but I know it can be done somehow. It may be fixed by July or September, when I'll have time to work on it. In the meantime, your link leads just to that explanation and a vaguely useful external link. Tony (talk) 16:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: adminship

I have considered it a few times. I've often lamented not having admin powers (especially when restructuring category trees and other mundane activities that require lots of deletion). I've seen that many people want to see admins going out of their way to use their powers, and really the only administrative duty I see myself doing is speedy deletion/vandal blocking, in addition to maintenance of Portal:Weather (I'm actually going to need to do a lot of page moving/deleting if I ever finish the "On this day" section). Then again, I've been here for 3+ years, haven't stepped on any toes (as far as I know) and am pretty sure I know the ropes fairly well (I actually maintained a wiki for my fraternity for a short time, so I'm familiar with some technical aspects of adminship). If you think I'd make a good candidate, I'll certainly throw my hat in the ring.-Running On Brains 20:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I have transcluded it. Thanks!-Running On Brains 22:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

U1 deletions

I forgot to tag this one if you wouldn't mind! pablo_hablo. 21:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! pablo_hablo. 21:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon season

I recently moved the article to my main space and redirected it to fix it. Today, I decided that I couldn't finish it anytime soon. So I copied the article and pasted it to the main space article. Could you delete the main space one and move User:Anhamirak/2005PTS to the real Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon season article to save the history.

At the same time, I tried to move the user space article to the main space, but I had a typo so could you delete Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon seaosn?

Thanks: --An ha mi rak 21:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Note: it seems to be that Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon seaosn has the full edit history, and Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon season doesn't, so I would say Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon season should be deleted and Timeline of the 2005 Pacific typhoon seaosn moved to replace it. Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 21:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Grrrr

Dontcha just hate those protection conflicts? :) Acalamari 23:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Outline of knowledge WikiProject update 05/10/2009

Development is moving steadily forward. We haven't created any new outlines lately, but a lot of editing of our existing outlines is taking place. Take a look at Buaidh's contributions. :)

I'm impressed.

I can safely say we now have another fanatic working on the project.

Importance of watching

A big danger to new pages or pages that have low traffic are prods. These are deletion proposals that don't have to go through AfD. If a prod sits on a page, any page, 5 days without opposition, the page can be deleted without discussion.

Such pages can be undeleted without discussion too, but there's usually a delay, especially if you don't notice the page missing right away. Prods create undesirable gaps in the subject coverage of list sets.

I just caught one the other day, so keep an eye on the outline pages!

Tangent: Indexes

One of the benefits of reverse outlining is the discovery of problems (gaps in coverage, etc.) with the publication being outlined. We've come across several and have been fixing those as we go. Because hypertext tables of contents are only as good as the pages they link to, we've been cleaning up large sections of Wikipedia. This was something I did not foresee when I started this project.

One of the sets of pages we link to on the outlines is the set of indexes, formerly called "List of x topics". Unfortunately, the lists of topics were divided between 2 different sets competing for the same article names, and this impeded development of both sets. One of those sets were indexes, and the rest are outlines (more about these below).

So I set about splitting up the 2 sets, by renaming the indexes to "Index of x articles" or "Index of x-related articles".

All 450 or so of them.

Nobody has complained about the new names, but 2 or 3 people thought I was way too bold to attempt this without a proposal or discussion first. Just 2 or 3 people. That's about as much opposition as you could expect for moving a single page.

Not bad for a move of this volume.

There are many more indexes out there, but our main concern are those which are provided links on the outlines. Many of those are redlinks (gaps in coverage as mentioned above), and so we need a way to track these and direct editor attention to them so that somebody creates them...

So, I've created a page for the set, that parallels the OOK list:

See Portal:Contents/Index.

The complete list of "Index of" articles can be found at User:The Transhumanist/Index, and this list needs to be gone over to make sure each article index listed is included on the portal page above. If you help with this, please put - placed after each entry that you check and place.

Thank you.

To further support the development of index pages, and provide a central place for people to go to find out more about indexes and what needs to be done, I've created the Index WikiProject.

Hidden outlines

There are outline pages hiding all over Wikipedia. They aren't in OOK's formats, but we can fix that. :)

Converting existing outlines and absorbing them into the OOK is a lot easier than creating outlines from scratch, and it avoids unnecessary duplication of effort. But before we can convert them, we have to find them...

A hunt is underway for non-OOK outlines. So far, User:Gimme danger is in the lead and has found the most. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge#The hunt for hidden outlines for more information.

Please don't rename any non-standard outlines you come across to OOK's standard naming until after you reformat them. Renaming them only after they are reformatted helps us keep track of which outlines have and have not been converted.

Thank you.

Converting outlines

The way I usually do this is by substituting the relevant outline generator template at the beginning of the outline, which forces the existing outline to the bottom of the page. Then I add an "under construction" tag, and then move all the links from the original outline to the relevant sections in the standard structure. It is important to finish the conversion quickly, so as not to create confusion. Then I scour Wikipedia for missing links (using Google to do a site-specific search of Wikipedia), to make the upgraded outline more comprehensive than the converted outline. Be sure to check all related categories too. Add a lead paragraph, add external links, and voila!

Better than before.

Where we're heading

The next phase in the evolution of this project is to increase participation by expanding the Wikipedia community's awareness of the Outline of knowledge, its purpose, and what needs to be done for any given subject.

This will entail placing banners on the outlines' talk pages, the talk page for the WikiProject associated with the subject of each outline and of each planned outline, and on the talk page of each article corresponding to each outline and to each planned outline.

Then instructions on improving subject access, including the creation and development of an outline for each subject, will be posted on every related WikiProject page. (There's a WikiProject for the subject of most outlines).

We will also be sending notices to every member of every WikiProject associated with the subject of each and every outline and planned outline.

But before this happens, the outline guidelines and the article draft for the topic "Outline" must be completed. Without these, many editors will not know what an outline is, or what to do to build and improve them.

And that's our current bottleneck.

Once those are ready (the guideline and article), we can take this project to the next level.

Keep up the good work

Well, that's all for now.

Until next time,

The Transhumanist 00:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S. (Juliancolton)

Hi Julian.

I noticed that the Outline of meteorology isn't hooked in anywhere. It's an orphan. Would you please place links to it in the most appropriate places?

And have you looked at it lately? Being more experienced than you were a year ago, you might know something more to add to it? :)

Also, we don't yet have an Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of hurricanes

Or an Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of storms.

(hint hint).

The Transhumanist 00:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Quick question

Is there a draft template for basic outlines, like there was for the country pages? Or do I actually have to build Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of tropical cyclones manually? :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It's Template:Outline generator. The instructions are on the template. Please let me know if those instructions are understandable or need improvement. The Transhumanist 00:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I've added to the instructions on the template. (About the "General concepts" section).

Have fun.

The Transhumanist 00:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Help Please.

Hi, can you help with this user. He is now on his 4th or 5th revert in the last 24h on the Andy Murray article. Thanks. Alan16 ^talk 00:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank You. Alan16 ^talk 01:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Since you locked the Andy Murray article for "persistent unsourced speculation", you may want to comment at User_talk:Alan16#Re:_Help. Gimmetrow 03:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Baxall Business Centre

Hi, I think you recently deleted my baxall business centre article. Please can you tell me why this is, what would i need to do to make it acceptable? Thanks MJTK —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjtk (talk • contribs) 10:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

T-rappville salt denial

I was counting it under multiple titles, all by the same user. Counting the A7's from all the titles he used, I counted 10 different instances of this, not 2. ViperSnake151 Talk 14:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of FreePoverty

I do not understand why you have deleted FreePoverty — please tell me the reasoning behind your deletion and how the article was "non-notable." I do not believe it was "non-notable" because I know what was written there. No where on the page was anything describing the website other than the infobox. Everything was about the organization, its goals/aims, its contributions, and quotes from the spokesperson. FreePoverty's article was a notable website and was clearly listed as a stub at the bottom of the page. —Untitledmind72 (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Françoise Lebrun

Just thought I'd let you know that I undeleted Françoise Lebrun, an article you had recently deleted due to an expired prod, after an IP on my talk made a reasonable request for undeletion. I am not yet convinced she is worthy of having an article here, though, so if no sources can be found that would satisfy WP:BIO it may be appropriate to take the article to AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

deletion log of page

Hello, I have a very serious problem. I am the person referred to in the recently deleted Wikipedia page "Chandana Paul". Unfortunately that page was created prematurely, before I was aware of the wikipedia guidelines for notability of scientists. So I was happy to see it deleted and even suggested it myself. However after the deletion, there are still comments about my work as a researcher on the deletion log. In particular, it says things such as "not a notable scientist", "Google find her resume, but nothing really amazing or outstanding", etc. While these may be true according to the wikipedia guidelines, it is certainly not true in the scientific world, and in general my work, both quantity and quality wise is regarded highly. I am afraid that these comments will damage my reputation, as they are still out there and publicly accessible to people, and it is the only thing they find when they search for my name. If a page is to be deleted, I think *everything* about it should be deleted. It shouldnt be that just the negative, potentially slanderous, judgements remain. I am wondering what can be done about this. Would it be possible to get rid of the deletion log for this page? I am going to be applying for academic jobs this fall, and am afraid that such comments, made by people outside the field and not really aware of the implications of my work, will nonetheless damage my chances. Wikipedia should not have the undue effect of slander or damaging someone's reputation. TarahSky (talk) 23:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Nothing we can do about the log, but I have courtesy blanked the AfD for you. I won't delete it, but that should be sufficient. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hurricane Katrina effects by region

It appears that coordination within the article "Hurricane Katrina effects by region" and between it and other Wiki articles on Katrina is lacking. On first read the "Hurricane Katrina effects by region", the article appears to have some outdated data (for example, 7 dead in Florida vs. 14 in another location; Nagin not ordering Manditory Evacuation (when actually he did so on August 28); the count of 10,000 people in the Superdome vs 30,000; 236 dead in Miss. vs. 238). Would you mind if I edited it a bit?Johnherrick (talk) 23:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Socking

I think I found an IP sock of a user, but I'm not sure what to do. See User talk:Muckdoethewonderdog and User:75.147.9.49. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I think these are just disruptive edit-warring editors. Block as necessary. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I had always used rollback before, but I downloaded Huggle today and was astonished at how much more efficient it was. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Mea culpa

Sorry for the accidental rollback of edits to your talk page here - I slipped while attempting to hit rollback on an article on recent changes while drinking tea at the same time. Cue sillyness and my frantic hitting of undo. - Chrism would like to hear from you 00:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback rights

Thanks for the rights. I'll try to deserve the trust. I'll get this mistake cleaned up as soon as I can. --droll [chat] 04:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

Recently you deleted an article: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Koel_Bewaren

I understand why, but because I was on holiday I did not get the chance to respond before deletion. I could have added more information and references to the discussion.

How can I retrieve the article or text?

Many thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devoster (talk • contribs) 08:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A More Perfect Onion (talk) 12:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

follow-up #2 A More Perfect Onion (talk) 13:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Goposaur

You deleted Goposaur today, I believe. When I looked for it a few minutes ago, it was still there, with added references and information provided by someone else. However, the talk page had been deleted. I looked it up today because I got an e-mail from someone who wanted to further edit the article. On the basis of the recommendations, I too would have deleted the article, but I was wondering if the added information might suggest the article need not be deleted, since it locates Goposaur in the national media. I apologize if reestablishing the talk page violates any protocol. The article was posted in good faith in the first place supposing that people might be interested in the origin of the Goposaur. Jim Lacey (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

      Juliancolton, I would appreciate your restoring Goposaur to my page. Thank you! Jim Lacey (talk) 15:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

RfB?

Hey, Julian. Before I head off to work a shift at WP:ACC, I'd like to ask you something: are you interested in running to become a bureaucrat? I've thought about this for part of the day, and I think I can conduct a review if you'd like me to. I'd say that your chances are pretty high, given the comments at Wikipedia:Editor review/Juliancolton 3. If you're interested, I'm hoping that I can get a nomination up by June 13 (that way the RfB will close on my birthday :)). Best, Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 20:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, OK! (I have Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Juliancolton and Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Juliancolton 2 on my watchlist; depending on the choice of the nominator, your RfB (if you decide to have one in the future) could be either one!) Best, Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 22:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, just as an unrelated question that I've been wanting to ask you, could you please give me a tutorial on how Special:AbuseFilter works? Thanks! --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 23:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Changing username

Seeing that you comment much on Wikipedia:Changing username, I think you should take a look, because although I've made over 5200 edits, the bot checking it says I have made none. Could you help? themaee ^talk 20:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Happiness protection

Your semi-protect on Happiness recently expired. Vandalism has again broken out. You may want to considering protecting the article again in some capacity.

Thanks. Anythingapplied (talk) 21:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Socking (2)

This time, for real: 75.155.127.110 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)[4] and Bmx8016 (talk · contribs) [5]. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, I need Wikipedia:Featured article review/Omnipotence paradox to be moved to Wikipedia:Featured article review/Omnipotence paradox/archive1. Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 00:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Omnipotence paradox needs to be deleted. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thank You

My RFA passed today at 75/2/1 so I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. Special thanks go to GlassCobra and FlyingToaster for their nomination and support. Cheers! --Rosiestep (talk) 02:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hurricane Luis article under attack again

Excuse us, but we saw that the Hurricane Luis page was under attack again. There were unclean and improper edits by Wikipedia editors operating under IP Address number 81.248.133.92-they are vandalizing Hurricane Luis and undoing edits we made for the cleanup. Can someone please semi-protect the Hurricane Luis pages for at least sixteen days-possibly longer-we cannot print vandalized articles as research to our UWEC class. We performed clean editing on the retirement sections of Hurricane Luis by address number 12.227.185.235, although that was changed to other addresses and eventually this:173.26.80.178 (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC).

Also informing you that Hurricane Georges may need cleanup and revamping. We made some improvements to Hurricane Georges, but there's so many questionable/improper edits that the cleanup may be better done by professional editors working at Wikipedia. When our class prints articles-especially the ones being tropical and weather related-the articles must be really properly edited; we cannot use articles with bad grammar, vulgar language or vandalism on them. 173.26.80.178 (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much Julian. Kudos.173.26.80.178 (talk) 03:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hee Hee

I'm not knocking Simple English, I'm just saying that we don't need to link every word over here on the regular english wiki because people are expected to understand. (I could never contribute there without beating my head against a wall :P) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 12:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA, which was unable pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Hopefully, if/when I have another RfA I will win your support. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -down load ׀ sign! 01:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Tom Brusky

I noticed that you deleted the article after an expired prod. I found out about the deletion at WikiProject Wisconsin. I looked him up on google, and I do find reliable sources, especially from the Wisconsin Polka Hall of Fame [6]. Would you consent to me restoring the page and adding reliable sources to the page? He probably meets WP:MUSIC criteria 6. "member of two or more independently notable ensembles" and maybe 7. "become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city" but should definitely meet the general notability criteria of multiple reliable sources (1.). Royal broil 03:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barry Hunau

When closing deletion requests, you should actually be reading what is said not just counting the votes as you can only have done in this case based upon the the speed of your edits. As Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators explains, "Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument, and underlying policy (if any)". If you look at the two delete votes you should see that the first one is really just an "other stuff exists" argument and the second one, or at least the particular suggestion about notable awards has been shown to be questionable. I have to admit to not having a huge amount of experience regarding closing AfD's though but perhaps relisting to allow the discussions to continue and hopefully more editors to contribute would have been the better option. Adambro (talk) 08:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I keep track of nearly every AfD throughout their seven day discussion periods, which allows for me to close them efficiently when appropriate. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 08:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, apologies for suggesting you perhaps hadn't properly assessed the situation. Must be like a full time job though keeping track of so many AfD's!. Regards. Adambro (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Deleated Artikel WILHELM OTTERMANNS

Dear Julian, You have been deleted the artikel WILHELM OTTERMANNS. May i please you to notice that not all knowledge of mankind can be found at wikipedia and google. Persons, their work e.t.c. should be treatet with respect, even if they are not found a hundreds of time at google inbecause google is not the nonplusultra of relevanty. However, if you would have been interested in finding pictures of Wilhelm Ottermanns you could have made a research for it. There are other ways of researche than wiki and google intern. Even here you could have found pictures: http://www.romkerhall.net/ukAtelier-Willi-Ottermanns.htm You would have become the possibility to make further research by contact the grandson, There are not all pictures to be seen, such as the political stored at archive by the family. However, erverybody can delete, deform, manupulate at wikipedia at anytime. For that reason i have to ask mysef if working on wikipedia makes any sens (for me) at all. But i have to say that pointing out that i have repect for those who have a serious interest in their, as well as OTHERS artikels. It is up to you. Kind regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.33.37 (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Review of Bridge_to_Terabithia_(2007_film)

I have started the GA review of Bridge_to_Terabithia_(2007_film) here, but am not sure whether it can be promoted to a good article. Can you please help me out here? Thanks. Pmlinediter ^Talk 09:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I am passing the article as GA. I had my doubts since I have seen the film and the details included in the article were sometimes trivial. But at any rate, I too realized that it was okay. Thanks for helping me. Happy editing. Pmlinediter ^Talk 09:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at Pmlinediter's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Pmlinediter ^Talk 09:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Move Perseus Jackson (character)

Can you please move Perseus Jackson (character) to Percy Jackson (character) per WP:COMMONNAME? Thanks. Pmlinediter ^Talk 10:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC) (on behalf of WP:PJTF)

Thanks. Pmlinediter ^Talk 10:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Admin coaching

Hi there! Wadester16's RfA finished today, so do you have a slot open for another student (or coachee)? The project is pretty inactive, so I would've registered myself there, but everyone else is overbooked. And congratulations on a successful student. =) A v N 18:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I'm on my way out here, so I'm not logged in, but I'll be back in about 20 hours.

Thanks for the opportunity. -AvN

122.162.176.133 (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm online again. How do we go about this? A v N 14:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

1966 Pacific hurricane season

I created the article a long time ago but the creation history is at User:Anhamirak/PSOTD. Could you merge the history to the 1966 Pacific hurricane season?

Thanks --An ha mi rak 22:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Template talk:GFDL-presumed

G8 explicitly exempts "any page that is useful to the project." This page contains alot of the discussion about the deprecation, and is probably linked from other pages. Could you please restore it? ViperSnake151 Talk 14:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

IP:78.188.21.157

Hi. This IP user:78.188.21.157 makes unconstructive edits (vandalisms) on t.A.T.u.. He/she made more than 10 edits today. More than 4 warnings have been given to this IP and yet he/she makes unconstructive edits. I gave him/her a final warning, but still, continues with edits on t.A.T.u.. I would recommend a block. Kind regards--Parvazbato59 (talk) 20:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Johnston AfD

This should be revisited in a few months, once the dust settles a bit.

Please, no. Don't doom WP to a replay of this. I do take the point you're making here, but could you perhaps consider adjusting the emphasis, if only by changing "should" to "may"?

[No need to reply anywhere.] -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

G11

I declined a G11 on Homestead Bicycles; you put it back. That's either wheel -warring or very close to it. Please revert it and reopen the AfD and let it run to the end. I am not sure the article should be kept, but it does not meet the speedy requirements, for it might be possible to rewrite it. I had already begun doing so. DGG (talk) 02:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't re-add the G11 tag, I simply closed the AfD per WP:SNOW. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

right, I should have been more specific, TPH put it back, which he has no right to do, and you abetted him in it. One does not make a snow close if an ed in good faith opposes. I had said in the discussion it was not a speedy. Amounts to the same thing. I've decided to let it rest, because the article isn't worth it. DGG (talk) 02:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright. I restored the page and re-opened the AfD. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delboy (musician)

Will you please Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delboy (musician), which is filled with many WP:SPA votes? The discussion has run for over 7 days, and I'm tired of having to revert the edits of SPAs who repeatedly remove my comments. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 04:00, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonia–Indonesia relations

Hi Julian,

could you please undelete this article and make it a re-direct to Foreign relations of Estonia, so the content can be merged? I or someone else will get around to doing the merge eventually, as time permits. Wikipedia's policy implies that if an article fails the notability criteria, the first option is to merge the article into another, rather than outright deletion [7]. Re-directs are cheap. Other admins have agreed to this approach, for example see here. Thanks. --Martintg (talk) 04:11, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

ditto for Estonia–Thailand relations, thanks. --Martintg (talk) 04:16, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

A couple questions for you...

What are the benefits of a tree structure?

The article doesn't say.

I'm interested, because I need to explain the benefits in the guideline on outlines I'm writing. (Outlines are a type of tree structure).

I've also asked the question at various reference desks, and these threads may help to jump start your brain on this question. :)

What are the benefits of outlines, over and above regular articles?

What benefits have you noticed?

How are Wikipedia's outlines useful to you?

I look forward to your answers on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 04:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like you've received helpful comments at the various refdesks. Personally, I've found outlines to be helpful in terms of organizing boatloads of info that you would otherwise have to trudge through manually; we're a huge encyclopedia, so they certainly make navigation more convenient. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by "trudge through manually"? The Transhumanist 16:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I suppose I could have worded that better, but I meant that in, say, United States, you have hundreds of links in no particular order, and it's nearly impossible to find what you want efficiently. Outline of the United States, on the other hand, provides all the links in an organized (and visually appealing) manner. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice comparison. That helps a lot. Thank you. The Transhumanist 16:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Another Coachee?

Do you have anymore space for another Coachee? Lemme Know. Thanks, Otisjimmy1 (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I will do so. Thanks, Otisjimmy1 (talk) 19:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Advice/Opinion?

Hello,

This is sort of in regards to your Levi Johnson close, but really is mostly a general question. You closed it as "keep" and said most of the deletes amounted to "I don't like it" votes. I was expecting it to result in no consensus, which of course would have the same end result.

I was under the impression that fame didn't automatically equate with notability. If it doesn't, it is hard to imagine an individual being famous for less than Levi. Now, perhaps I am just wrong on this point, but I have seen AfDs close as delete for basically that reason - primarily for internet memes and such... So basically the question is, in your opinion should an article ever be deleted if the subject meets the letter of the law (coverage in multiple reliable sources)?

Is there some kind of general consensus about this, or is it strictly a case-by-case basis type of thing?

P.S. don't read anything into this, as I'm just trying to learn here. :)

Thanks, --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

So then, let me make sure I understand. 1) In general fame (and RS coverage) is not always sufficient? 2) It probably is in most cases, but there are exceptions as determined by AfD consensus? 3) In Johnson's case the sheer mass of coverage over a long period of time makes it not a judgment call anymore? --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Sniperking134

Howdy.

Blocked user, asking for you by name with a helpme. Am just passing the message along. User talk:Sniperking134#Help request. Cheers, Chzz ► 19:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thx, get well soon. Does make me chuckle tho, as it says you are 'under the weather' directly above the Tropical Cyclone banner :-) Chzz ► 20:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Wind Turbine Syndrome

Hello Juliancolton

While doing research I came across the deletion log for Wind Turbine Syndrome. Could you possibly clarify why this wiki page was selected for deletion?

Best Regards grdoorguy

05-14-09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grdoorguy (talk • contribs) 23:29, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Greetings

I'd like to ask about this file "tarkin 10.jpg" whether it has been deleted or moved. It would be nice to have it in the article of Peter Cushing. Thank you :) --62.216.117.62 (talk) 00:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops, it was "tarkin10.jpg". So without a space. --62.216.117.62 (talk) 00:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Can it be found..? --62.216.117.62 (talk) 02:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Bilateral relation pages despite ongoing merging effort

For future reference, it is considered inappropriate to attempt to use your experience as an admin to support your own argument. See WP:5EVIL, specifically pillar #4. a little insignificant 00:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I had no intention of doing so; I only mentioned my position in the interest of full disclosure. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Sorry for being so harsh. What I mean is that when supporting the temporary cease of AfDs, you stated only your experience and gave no specific reason for supporting it. a little insignificant 01:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

NPWatcher Request

Hi Julian, sorry to nag you but I put in arequest for NPWatcher several days ago and could really use it. Thanks and get well soon,--Skater (talk) 01:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you consider ...

Wikipedia:DONTQUOTEPERSONALESSAYSASPOLICY restoration ... it was deleted during an active discussion by speedy. It is a legitimate link to an essay I am invoking, and the opposition has nominated it and it was speeded, and now appears as a red link in those discussions --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 05:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Note: This is already at DRV. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA

Thank you! Flying Toaster 07:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

GAN/M

Hi Julian! I have just finished my first GAR, and was wondering if you would mind giving a 2O on my review and my decision to put it on hold. Thanks in advance! decltype (talk) 12:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Oh, and I didn't see that you were feeling "under the weather", if I did I would have asked somebody else. Again, thanks. decltype (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Optimal Thinking

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Optimal Thinking. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Newthoughtguy (talk) 16:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

There was this title but no comment so I decided to occupy it. Thank you for your help :) --62.216.117.62 (talk) 23:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.}, TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — ^talk

FWIW, I hope you feel better soon. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:02, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at A More Perfect Onion's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A More Perfect Onion (talk) 20:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/InnoPath Software

For not noticing that the nominator had withdrawn before relisting :)

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

--Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

User

I think someone (name redacted but has 15 letters) has an appropriate handle. He chews at everyone's ankles long after the subject is dead. On the other hand..love the fish!

Johnherrick (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:PERM/R#User:Dylan620 III

You and the others were right back there; per the comments there, I am scrambling the password of the "Dylan620 III" account, and extending the use of the "Dylan620 II" account to my Wii. Could you please block the "Dylan620 III" account indef, and delete its userpage? Thanks! --Dylan 620 3 _{My master} 16:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Just as a quick question, why can't you block users upon request? --Dylan 620 _{Efforts · Toolbox} 17:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Should be uncontroversial: Anglo-Spain relations to Anglo-Spanish relations. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Who needs the tools when you have people who can do it in 30 seconds for you ;) Dabomb87 (talk) 22:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Fail

A couple of fail moments. ;-) Jamie^☆S93 00:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes. The servers were certainly problematic about an hour ago. So much for that AfD script? XD Jamie^☆S93 00:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I think my fish is bigger then Jamie's :) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I would happen to agree. The size discrepancy was made on purpose, to contrast both absurdities. Jamie^☆S93 12:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Copyedit :)

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

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

Cyclone biskit 02:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

50 AWB tasks

I think it is safe to go ahead with this task now. I've copied the previous thread for your convenience...

The U.S. State article lists in the form "List of x-related topics" (where x is the name of a state) have been changed to "Index of x-related topics". The links in the encyclopedia need to be updated.

For each state AWB needs to be used to make a list of "what links here" specifying "List of x-related topics". Then filter down the list to the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces.

Then set the search/replace feature to find "List of x-related topics" and replace it with "Index of x-related articles".

If there's a way to integrate these tasks so as to do fewer runs (50 is a lot), more power to ya! :) Like copying the search/replace string and typing in the 50 state names into them all at once in the search/replace section.

If you have questions, comments, problems, etc., please chat me up on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 04:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll be able to help if you need any assistance. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Looking at his contributions shows that Robert Skyhawk hasn't been around for over a month. We definitely need somebody else to do these. I guess that means you. :)

The make list steps of all the tasks can be combined (by entering all the pagenames and clicking "make list" after each entry). That way, you only have to use the list filter once. Likewise, the search/replace strings for each link to be replaced should all be entered before you press "start". By setting AWB up in this way, you should be able to do all 50 states in one pass.

Good luck.

Have fun.

And if you learn any shortcuts or better ways of doing this, please let me know!

The Transhumanist 20:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright, got it (for the most part). There is one part that I don't quite understand, however:

"For each state AWB needs to be used to make a list of "what links here" specifying "List of x-related topics". Then filter down the list to the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces."

Could you explain this further? Thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Since the time I wrote that, I figured out how to combine the tasks into a single pass on AWB.

The goal of the task is to change the links "List of Alabama-related topics", "List of Arkansas-related topics", etc. (wherever they appear in pages in the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces) to "Index of Alabama-related articles", "Index of Arkansas-related articles", etc.

So, start AWB and use the make list feature. From the selection of list types available, click "What links here". Then in the input box, type "List of Alabama-related topics" (without the quotation marks). Then click "make list" or press Enter.

Then before you do anything else, repeat the above step for the remaining states. ("List of Alaska-related topics", "List of Arkansas-related topics", etc.) The list you are making will grow each time. (Tip: instead of typing the whole thing in each time, you can paste "List of -related topics" and fill in the state name).

When you are done building the list, you need to filter it. At the bottom of the make list section is the filter feature. Click on it, which should bring up the filter window. It lets you choose which namespaces you want included or excluded from the list you just made. Select the namespaces you want to keep (main, portal, and wikipedia), and then activate the filter. It will remove all unwanted pages from the page list.

When you are done filtering the list, then you need to set up the search/replaces. Enter in all 50 of them into the search/replace feature of AWB.

Once those are entered, you are ready to rock and roll. Press "Start".

Good luck. Have fun.

Let me know if you need further assistance.

The Transhumanist 21:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Important: I just remembered, there's a problem with Georgia (because of the country by that name). You'll need to use "List of Georgia (U.S. state)-related topics" and "Index of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles". Sorry I forgot about that. That could have been disastrous. The Transhumanist 21:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I already noticed that. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

50 AWB Tasks Julian? Good luck! I'm around if you need my help! :) The Helpful One 13:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Levi Johnston

What is the second (or third and fourth, if more than two) event? KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

You stated in your early closing[8] "The subject's notability clearly goes beyond one event" - what are the other events, please? KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP1E, "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a particular event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, low profile, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted." The individual in question is not low-profile (and is unlikely to be for a while), so that policy doesn't apply. Moreover, Johnston's notability is not limited to the initial media craze; he continues to be covered by secondary, reliable sources, as evidenced by Google News results from the past week alone. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:26, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's "not keeping a low profile". That's not "more than one event". I repeat the question: What is the "more than one event"? And if there is none, please rephrase your close to reflect your rationale, which seems to be "is not keeping a low profile" and not, as you put in your closing comment "clearly goes beyond one event". Thanks much - KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

It's more than one event because the subject is being covered in reliable sources after the event itself; thus he is no longer notable for the initial event alone. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

No, its still one event. He got Bristol Palin pregnant. If there is another event, please name it here. I concur that he has not kept a low profile, but if it is "more than one" event, then it is two or more, and you can name the second event. Please do so, or correct your closing of this Afd, in which you very incorrectly state that "most of the keeps were IDONTLIKEITS". They were not, they were using the point I have made here. I am not challeging your early close, mind you, but I am asking for accuracy in your comments. Thanks - KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct; he got Bristol Palin pregnant. His fame grew over subsequent weeks and months, and as a result he was extensively covered in thousands of reliable sources. Therefore, his notability is not limited to one event. Also, I didn't say most of the delete votes were IDONTLIKEIT—I said some of them bordered on IDONTLIKEIT. That said, I still feel my close was accurate. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Gonna ask a third time - just name one more event. What is the second event? KillerChihuahua^?!? 10:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Julian didn't bring this up but this edit to an unrelated AFD caused the Levi Johnson AFD to be accidentally transcluded on the log for the 7th. When he closed it it's likely that he thought it had run for 7 days. That being said, from a quick glance at the discussion in question, it looks like their was plenty of participation and plausible arguments on both sides. A "keep" or "no consensus" close was reasonable but if it were me, I would have reopened it and let it run the other 2 days considering how close it was. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I intentionally closed it early, as it was fast becoming diluted with off-topic fluff; by the time I had closed it, the discussion wasn't going anywhere exceptionally productive. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

And I have already noted I am not taking issue with the early closure, the decision, nor the assertion that the article fails BLP1E, at least due to not keeping a low profile - my question is very narrow, and has yet to be answered. You say "more than one" and I say, please name at lest one more event beyond the relationship with Bristol Palin. thanks. KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

As I previous noted, the number of specific events is irrelevant in this case. However, Ottava answered your question in detail – most notably, his participation at the convention is a separate event. The custody/relationship issues are a separate event, as well. As is the controversy related to this statement. I don't think any of us are particularly fond of the manner in which Johnston became notable, but he is indeed notable. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

So you are saying that he was at the convention due to his own merit? Not because of his relationship to the Palins? I must say I disagree strongly. There is no indication Johnston is a notable Republican in any way, not even to the lowest level it would take for him to participate in the convention. Are you seriously saying he was there for some other reason? KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I did say that; I said it was a contributing factor. It seems that for the time being, we'll have to agree to disagree. Perhaps a discussion at DRV would yield some useful outside views? Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Drv would be exceeingly pointless, as I am not arguing the decision, nor disputing it. I am asking you to explain a statement you made, which you either fail to understand the question or you are ignoring it. What is the second event? You say convention; I ask do you think that is something which has nothing to do with his relationship? and you say (if I understand you correctly) that "it was a contributing factor" - is that an answer to that question? Please be clear, I beg of you. Are you saying that Johnston was at the Republican convention on his own merit and not due to his relationship with the Palins? And if he was at the convention due to his relationship with the Palins, then what is the "second event"? I am interested only in your view, as the closing admin who stated "clearly more than one event". Thanks, KillerChihuahua^?!? 18:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I do indeed understand your question, and I've answered it several times. Though his initial fame was derived from one event, there has been sufficient media coverage since then to propel his notability beyond that single event; including, but not limited to, his participation at the convention, regardless of how he got there. Still, I emphasize upon "not limited to" because there have been other events, which I explained above. To summarize, his relationship with Bristol Palin was most certainly not limited to one event. That he was Tripp's father is the most significant event, yes, but then you have to take into account the controversy that surrounded it, and the subsequent personal issues. So we're already up to three specific events. I'd be happy to elaborate further if necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

apologies, but I have not seen where you have answered it with enough clarity to be sure I understood your meaning, and I appreciate you rephrasing to ensure I do. If I understand you correctly, your position is that the definition of "one event' in your view is that the relationship with the Palins can be broken down into sub-events, yes? I believe you understand that my view is that all of the "events" - the convention, appearance on Oprah, etc - are merely details of the One event, namely, his relationship with the Palins (due to his involvement with Bristol Palin.) Do you see any errors in my synopsis? thanks - KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

That's true to an extent, though I don't believe it's a matter of individual events in this case, and this belief stems from my interpretation of BLP1E. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:46, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Which leaves me with my original confusion regarding yoru remarks... I imagine you're getting tired of this, but if you are not so sick of this subject you want to just bury it with a stake in its heart, would you please explain what you mean by it not being "a matter of individual events"? Thanks. KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

My job in closing the AfD was to judge consensus, and that's exactly what I did. As such my views and beliefs are irrelevant. I have my own opinion, but the general agreement is that Levi Johnston is notable enough for inclusion within Wikipedia. There's nothing more to it, I'm afraid. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:02, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, well aware of the job of a closing admin, and as I've said numerous times already, I am not disagreeing with your decision, only trying to understand a comment you made. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I've explained myself several times, so I'm just throwing at various ideas at this point. Perhaps we can get an outside view? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:07, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate the chat which cleared things up for me, and also kudos for your rephrasing which will hopefully prevent anyone else from coming knocking on your door, puzzled as I was. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Another view

I think KC is mistaking event for one set of actions. WW2, for example, was not one event but her definition would make it seem like one. The interview on Oprah, for example, is a separate event. Going to the convention is a separate event. The birth of the child is a different event than the impregnation. Their separation is a separate event. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect, Ottava, if I wanted your opinion, I'd have asked on your talk page. KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the community's discussion and this is a community based area. It is clear that you misunderstood the notability requirements as pointed out above. Now, there is no reason for you to respond in such an incivil manner, especially when they were directed to -Julian- on -his- talk page. Perhaps you should strike your comments as inappropriate. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I am asking the closing admin to explain his comment. I am not interested in your opinion. I am not interested in anyone else's opinion, because I am asking for clarification of one person's remark, and only that person knows what was in his head. There is no incivility in this whatsoever. KillerChihuahua^?!? 18:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

His comments were very blatant. You didn't accept him. As I pointed out, the mistake was not with him. Did you read the page that you quoted by chance? I think you missed this line: "If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate". So, even if you were right, you are still wrong. And expressing that you don't want to hear from others is rather rude, which is the definition of incivility. If you are unwilling to hear from all viewpoints, then there is a problem. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Further

Hello Julian. I hope you don't mind me asking another question about your closing rationale. The closing rationale mentioned WP:BLP1E which I never thought was applicable, but did not mention WP:Tabloid#NEWS which is what I cited during the AfD. Why?Ferrylodge (talk) 01:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if it passes WP:BLP1E, it usually passes WP:NOT#NEWS as well; I'll amend my closing statement to say such. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I think WP:Tabloid has some stuff in it that applies to even high-profile people, no?Ferrylodge (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps, though I don't think it applies in this case. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It does, and it applies.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

How so? Thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(undent)OK, thanks for asking. (1) No significant historic notability; (2) Routine news coverage of tabloid journalism; (3) News coverage of individual does not go beyond context of a single event.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Coverage of Johnston isn't limited to the news, though, and not confined to the context a single event. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I think we both know that 99% of the coverage has been tabloid journalism. That he also appeared on Oprah or Tyra or whatever makes it more tabloidish, not less. And I think we also both know that 99% of the coverage has been motivated by the fact that he impregnated a relative of a famous poitician, which is one event in my book. In any event, your closing rationale still relies on the fact that he was not low-profile, which is not enough to overcome WP:Tabloid.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily. My closing rationale goes into sufficient detail, in my opinion, to explain why he is notable by Wikipedia's standards—and not just a media craze. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree 100% that he's notable, though not necessarily in the sense that he warrants his own article. A lot of tabloid personalities are well-known. Like I said, WP:Tabloid is not limited to low-profile people. "Our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event."Ferrylodge (talk) 01:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that like all keep closures, the keeps (like me) agree and the deletes disagree. Why don't you guys take it to DRV or put it up for AfD again if you disagree? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 01:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

A DRV would be alright, though it's too soon for another AfD nomination. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I came here this evening because the closure notice completely overlooked the rationale that I gave in the AfD. Now Julian has corrected that, for which I'm grateful. Should I have not requested it? Plus this conversation has been educational for me. I actually listen to what other people say, and try to learn from it. So, I'll ask another question to educate myself further: does Wikipedia have a list of people who are famous for only one event and therefore do not have their own articles?Ferrylodge (talk) 01:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

To answer your first question: not at all, I'm happy to discuss any of my actions. As for your second question, I don't believe so, but here is a rough list of AfDs in which WP:BLP1E was cited. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks.Ferrylodge (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I bet some of the band members of the bands at One-hit wonder have been redirected or deleted, although it would be a chore to look through them all. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For making a tough decision that had to be made, correctly, and enduring the resulting slings and arrows with civility and grace befitting the highest standards of adminship. GRuban (talk) 10:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

GA question

Hey, I saw you were a GA mentor, so I thought maybe you could help me. A user took on my GAN nomination for Fatbeard (South Park), but hasn't responded for about two weeks. Is there a process I can go about for dropping his review and then relisting it? Please let me know, thanks! — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 13:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! I'm going to go ahead and make a post on WT:GAN because he hasn't responded since April 30 and I've left two messages on his talk page, but gotten no response. Thanks again! — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 16:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Optimal Thinking relist/undeletion

Julian,

Below are links to reviews on Optimal Thinking that I found per your request:

[9]

 2006, 2007, 2008

Respectfully,

Newthoughtguy (talk) 15:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Hurricane Tara (1961)

On 17 May, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hurricane Tara (1961), which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royal broil 16:43, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks again for your nomination and support. I'm sure I'll bug you with questions occasionally in the future. For now though, I have about 10 hours of reading :-D -Running On Brains 18:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

And while I'm at it, I may as well offer my first Barnstar:

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		Because I tried to figure out what you do in Wikipedia, and the answer is "pretty much everything". Keep it up! Running On Brains 18:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

WPOOK Update - 05/17/2009 - Blockbusting!

This project needs another shot in the arm.

So here it goes...

Countries WikiProject Collaboration - Contests!

I've contacted all 59 members of the Countries WikiProject to help in designing and conducting contests for the further development of the country outlines.

You are invited too.

Houston, we have a problem

The guidelines and outline article still aren't complete.

Which means you will be needed to help explain to the newcomers mentioned above what outlines are and how to develop them.

Please participate in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Hosting country coverage contests.

The Transhumanist 22:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Paradiso Girls

Sure you can't see a consensus there? 4 "deletes" citing established guidelines and one "redirect". On the "keep" side, User:Mahmud200, an editor with a whopping 4 contributions, uses "next big thing" and User:Whadaheck uses "there aren't any sources, but they have fans". Who knows who the anon is, but his argument seems to be "foreign Wikipedias haven't deleted it yet". Numerically, the deletes have it, and once the arguments are weighted, it's nearly a slam dunk.—Kww(talk) 00:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"Foreign Wikipedia's haven't deleted it yet" is a valid argument?—Kww(talk) 00:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I hate DRV, but here we go.—Kww(talk) 01:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Like I said, I hate DRV. I think that's the second one I've opened after participating in hundreds of AFDs.—Kww(talk) 02:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Juliancolton. One of the contributors to the deletion debate mentioned a template, {{The Paradiso Girls}}, that should also be deleted if the closure on the article debate was delete. It probably qualifies for a speedy now that the article is gone. Would you like to zap this as an adjunct to deletion of the article, or shall I tag it formally and let it grind through the gears? Thanks. Jim Ward ^{(talk·stalk)} 04:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok on the TfD. I'll move it ahead in just a moment. Thanks. Jim Ward ^{(talk·stalk)} 04:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Facepalm

[14] Facepalm wadester16 | Talk→ 02:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject User Rehab

Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Block review

Hi, me again. I just performed my first block (yay) and the user has requested unblocking. It was a blocking after 5-or-so warnings for removing "unverified" content (aka blanking most of the page), and he may have been right, but even after I personally asked him to stop he continued. Another IP involved in this quasi-edit-war (User talk:58.145.148.60) was much more willing to listen to reason. Anyway, the point is, could you take a look/respond to User talk:CakeMace? Let me know if my reasoning in this case was sound. -Running On Brains 04:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, duh, I just noticed that another admin already reviewed and declined. Thanks anyway! -Running On Brains 04:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Soxbot

Hi Julian. I don't need soxbot notifications for my talk page any more, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 04:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject User Rehab

Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. Abce2|AccessDenied 04:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Rehab User Box

National Mentoring Month Logo

This user is a participant of the WikiProject User Rehab

Feel free to put this anywhere on your user page. To edit this box for improvement click here

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 06:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

...? Lucifer (Talk) 06:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVI

Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 09:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

"then" before governor, president, director, etc. Question for you.

I see someone has added "then-" before President Bush in some locations (but not all) in the Katrina article (but not in front of "then" Governor Blanco). The change was deleted and then added back. It currently is not consistent with other articles in Wiki. For example the Iraq War article uses the more correct "U.S. President" not "then-President" i.e. (After Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, U.S. President George H. W. Bush started ....). I do not want to get involved in a war over this, but it looks strange the way it is.

What is your take?

Johnherrick (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Question about outlines

What do you think the ultimate goal should be for outlines on Wikipedia? I'm doubtful any of them will ever make FL-status, but should we build an assessment scale for the wikiproject? Just a thought. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about setting up a rating scale. Outlines have already started to be rated by the other WikiProjects they belong to (each outline belongs to one or more subjects, after all). On the importance scale of the matching subjects, since outlines are core pages for those, their priority should be ranked top - because each outline is the table of contents for its subject. Top priority. For example, for WikiProject Geography, the Outline of geography should be rated Top Priority because its scope is the subject itself, which gives it core significance.

Most rating scales include "List" as a class, which is ludicrous, because the classes are quality grades. The term "class" should be renamed to "quality". When grading quality, I would avoid "List" and use "A", "B", or "C" instead, but I would prefer if the ratings paralleled the priority rating system ("Top", "High", "Mid", "Low").

I'm against setting up a separate rating scale for outlines, because it is metawork. Just another layer of administration. It's better to focus on the actual work. But different people like different approaches, and so if I were to create a rating system for outlines, the quality rating would parallel the priority rating ("Top", "High", "Mid", "Low", "Crap"). :)

Just kidding on the "Crap" rating. Low is low enough. If it's lower than "Mid", the outline should still be in draft form in project space, where we don't have to worry about how crappy it is - they don't get moved until they have enough meat on them (that is, are good enough) to be moved to article space. So if you come across a crappy outline that is likely to get deleted, move it to the draft collection over at the Outline of knowledge WikiProject.

I hope I've been of help.

The Transhumanist 20:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

A question for you, concerning a possible contest...

To promote work on the country outlines, maybe a contest between country WikiProjects could be run, to see which WikiProject could develop the best country outline.

What do you think?

(I look forward to your reply on my talk page).

The Transhumanist 23:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task request

In AWB, please make a list from User:The Transhumanist/Sandbox01, and filter out all pages that are not outline talk pages or talk pages for outline drafts.

Then run AWB to replace {{WikiProject LOBT}} with {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Thank you.

Good luck.

The Transhumanist 00:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task request 2

In AWB, please make a list from User:The Transhumanist/Sandbox01, and filter out all pages that are not outline talk pages or talk pages for outline drafts.

Set AWB to not skip pages that do not exist. (We want to edit the empty talk pages too).

Set AWB to skip pages with {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Set AWB to prepend {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Run AWB on the list.

Thank you.

Good luck.

The Transhumanist 00:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task request 3

I found some more.

In AWB, please make a list using "What links here", and type "Template:WikiProject LOBT" into the input box.

Set AWB to skip pages it doesn't change. (Oops, forgot to specify that in the tasks above). :)

Then run AWB to replace {{WikiProject LOBT}} with {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Thank you.

Good luck.

The Transhumanist 01:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task request 4

And now for the geography-related outlines...

In AWB, please make a list from User:The Transhumanist/Sandbox01 (I've changed it), and filter out all pages that are not outline talk pages.

Set AWB to not skip pages that do not exist. (We want to edit the empty talk pages too).

Set AWB to skip pages with {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Set AWB to prepend {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}

Run AWB on the list.

Thank you.

Good luck.

The Transhumanist 01:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task request 5

In AWB, please make a list using "What links here", and type "Template:BT list coverage" into the input box.

Set AWB to skip pages it doesn't change.

Then run AWB to replace {{BT list coverage}} with {{Outline of knowledge coverage}}

Thank you.

Good luck.

The Transhumanist 02:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

From the editor: Writers needed
Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Aerospace article

Julian, I don't have a problem with the edit you made to the Talk: Aerospace page. I'm just curious as to the purpose of the edit. It appears you removed the {{BT list coverage|aerospace}} tag to {{Outline of knowledge coverage|aerospace}}. I was confused though, as the edit had no effect (link goes to the same place). Just for my own education and future knowledge, what's the difference? Thanks, and have a great day! Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

In further news...

it appears I broke your talk page... I'm not sure what I did, I used the leave me a message button to comment on your page. Sorry... Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it wasn't your fault; an above template broke. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sup

File:Pie.jpeg

PirateSmackK^Arrrr! has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

PirateSmackK^Arrrr! 16:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi there

When you're feeling better, drop me a note on my talk page about the admin coaching. =) Thanks, A v N 16:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Opinion Time!

Hello. I am known as Typingwestern 015. I need opinions on my home page. Come visit, and give me your honest oponions on my talk page. Typingwestern015 (talk) 16:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at Antivenin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A v N 20:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

why did u delete the harvard rejects band page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raveman92 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for rollback. I will use it with the utmost care. Cheers, Vicenarian (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review of bilateral AfD

since you have closed many of these bilateral AfDs, you might be interested in commenting on this Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 May 20. thanks LibStar (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

armenians in Japan

Dear Juliancolton,

Excuse me, I'm pretty new at wikipedia, so I'd like to ask you why did you delete the article about armenians in Japan on 03:59, 18 May 2009?

Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Temuraz (talk • contribs) 17:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Fruitland

Hi Julian, with this edit on my watchlist I saw the AfD hadn't been removed from FIS, would you do the honors? I'm involved up to my teeth there (hence why it went to AfD for a merger) and don't want to hear from the creator. Like the other, it probably needs semi to keep the creator from undoing the re-direct, which xe disagrees with. Thanks! StarM 12:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

thanks! StarM 21:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of counties in Alabama → Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of counties in Alabama/archive1. Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 01:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Delete Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of counties in Alabama please. Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 01:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred Martinez

I'm asking you, as the closer and deleter, to revisit this Afd and consider whether or not you weighed the discussions appropriately. I would have dismissed Stifle's interpretation of policy. Under his view, you might as well delete Algebra as a coatrack of Mathematics. Aside from that, WP:COATRACK is an essay, not a policy. King of Hearts didn't say anything worth considering. No policy, nothing. The only person that really went to extraordinary lengths to back up the article, was Pohick. I really don't want to bother with DRV because I feel this article was valid, sourced, established notability and was encyclopedic. Hence why I am asking you to revisit this Afd. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 02:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was fast. 3 seconds after I posted here, you replied. Thanks for revisiting the Afd... - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 02:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Fred Martinez has a featured film documentary about him, I'm working on getting a copy. Could you userfy this to me? -- Banjeboi 11:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Dead links in <Wikipedia|footnotes>

Julian, I have identified a number of footnotes that refer to dead links in Timeline of Hurricane Katrina (see below). I have not figured out how to access the footnotes to record that they are not working (or add a correct link). I think I have installed Wikiedit, but I am not sure. Could you give me some help in figuring this out? Thanks.

5 staff ^{[dead link‍]} 8 staff ^{[dead link‍]} 17 mcquaid ^{[dead link‍]} 18 bush ^{[dead link‍]} 19 walker ^{[dead link‍]} 23 walker ^{[dead link‍]} 25 landay ^{[dead link‍]} 27 DeVera ^{[dead link‍]} 33 Press Release. "Norfolk ^{[dead link‍]} 36 Douglas, Jack, Jr.; Dodd, ^{[dead link‍]} 42 Staff Writer. "Bush ^{[dead link‍]} 46 Loven, Jennifer ^{[dead link‍]} 50 News Release. "DEQ ^{[dead link‍]} 55 Bush, George W. "[:* Pres ^{[dead link‍]} 62 Ongoing coverage of the mental health impact of Hurricane Katrina by the national, weekly public radio program, The Infinite Mind ^{[dead link‍]}

Correct link: 2 blanco http://www.ldi.state.la.us/whats_new/61PRO2005.pdf

Johnherrick (talk) 02:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Julian,

I guess I was not clear, I wish to access the footnotes and correct the links. I can find a lot of the articles, but my problem is accessing the footnotes to mark them dead, or put in the revised one. I do not know how to do that - editing the page does not give me access to the footnotes and that is what I would like to do.

Thanks Johnherrick (talk)

Hooray! Found the problem! I switched to Firefox from IE, and ... voila, the footnotes are visible!! Got it covered now! Sorry to bother you, Johnherrick (talk) 01:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

ECRI

First time on and we are a very respected healthcare patient safety organization, part of the World Health Organization. I am editing now and putting up references - is this why the deletion? Is it best to enter small amounts of content at once? Appreciate any help you can provide. Carol Kocher, ECRI Institute Kocherecri (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Opinion Time Redux!

Thanks for the opinion about my user page. But I want to know what you really liked about my page. What was your favorite part? What could use improvement? Give me all the details. Typingwestern015 (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ECRI Institute —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kocherecri (talk • contribs) 17:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

BEAR closure

I just hit an edit conflict trying to say this...

Delete. It's too ambiguous to be useful. If it means "don't intentionally piss off other editors" then it should just say so. Using the word "bear" is hinting something about the other editor being over-sensitive (e.g. "bear with a sore head"), which might or might not be true, and is a rather offensive way of characteristing someone's position anyway. The tag has only been used three times on user talk pages—see listing—on Sceptre's (which doesn't count), on East718's (Cub Scout camping advice) and on TTN's (please stop nominating articles for AfD). As it's apparently never been used for its stated purpose, it won't be missed!

...when you closed it per SNOW. Is it too late for my comments to be considered? The MfD had only been running for a few hours! - Pointillist (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

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

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

For giving me rollback! --I dream of horses (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Lin jia jun

The correct one would be Lin Jia Jun. I called it a spelling error, but I guess the correct term would be capitalization error. I tagged it because I do think that redirs based on incorrectly capitalized names of non-notable participants of the show are implausible. decltype (talk) 04:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Please remove the rollback rights from this account and my alternate account, GT1345, as I will no longer be editing. GT5162 (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 20:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

Your opinion

Hi! I hope you are still on line. I happened to find something. Please take a look at this. Is it OK that they use our image with an article on Wikiporn? Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 01:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 02:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Ping!

You have mail. ∗ \ / {talk} 02:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

wow ... cool!

Thanks Julian, that means a LOT to me. I really appreciate that ;) I know it's an important project, so I'm just trying to do what I can to help. — Ched : ? 06:11, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

ThankSpam

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.
I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

~~~~~

This should ping the channel

Benders Game 15:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:2009_swine_flu_outbreak_table

I have nominated Template:2009 swine flu outbreak table for deletion. I have notified you because you created the template. Barnaby dawson (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

NAC reopens

Judging from what happened today with the Vince Orlando AFD, I think we need a clear guideline on when a closed AFD can be reopened beyond what is stated at WP:DELPRO. I tried to start several discussions about that but they went nowhere. My view is that closes, admin or not, should only be reversed if they were completely backwards or closed early for no good reason. Anything in the neighborhood of a reasonable close or anywhere close to 7 days (more then 144 hours) should go to DRV. That's what it's there for. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 17:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Has the shit hit the fan? - WPOOK update, 05/25/2009

Maybe...

We've started the next phase

I was experiencing mental block on the article draft for "outline" and on the outline guideline draft. And this was holding the whole project back. Without these (which are intended to explain the type of lists known as outlines in detail), the danger is higher that a controversy could go the wrong way.

I requested help on them, but there was none forthcoming.

So I went ahead and started us on the next phase of operations without those 2 pages...

Our AWB'ers and I have placed about 1600 notices all over Wikipedia. And the plan is to place several thousand more.

This generated only one complaint, but it was a very vocal one, and attracted a few other detractors who seemed unfamiliar with the concept of hierarchical outlines and their benefits. However, just as many or more editors came to the defense of the OOK, and there was no consensus formed. But, dab is still trying to rally opposition to outlines at the Village Pump. See below...

Administrator noticeboard incident and Village Pump policy discussion

It appears that the banner placed on the talk page of the Outline of Switzerland caught the attention of an editor named Dbachmann who posted a rather forceful message on my talk page, another on WT:WPOOK, another at WP:VPP, and still another at WP:AN!

He went well out of his way to use negative hype to cause a stir.

It appears that Mr. Bachmann doesn't understand the nature of hierarchical outlines and their applications. And though he implied that he has never seen an OOK outline before, he was involved with a discussion on these when they were called "lists of basic topics".

His primary argument is that outlines are content forks of articles, and violate WP:CFORK.

But "topic lists", of which outlines are a type, have been around for almost as long as Wikipedia, and fall under the WP:LISTS and WP:STAND guidelines. They aren't intended as forks, as they are lists, bringing the benefits of lists to the corresponding subjects, such as grouping and navigation.

Someone suggested an MfD, but lists are articles, and are within the jurisdiction of AfD. Only the portal page, which merely lists the outline articles, falls within the scope of the MfD department.

The administrator's noticeboard was considered the wrong venue for the discussion, and the discussion was closed.

But Dab's discussion at the Village Pump is still active. Hopefully level heads will prevail there too.

Now what?

Am I disheartened or deterred? Hell no. I say "full steam ahead!"

But we really need to finish the article draft and the guideline. Otherwise there will continue to be confusion.

Over the next week or two, we'll be posting another 1600 or so notices. It's a good thing we didn't send out 10,000 of them all at once. :)

The Transhumanist 23:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: Another related thread has popped up at WP:VPR#OoK's expediency. --TT 04:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rollback

Thanks for the grant - that was quick. If I'm not mistaken, that's the second time you've replied quickly to a request of mine, the first being my previous miscellany for deletion request. Thanks a million! -- A ^talk/_contribs 01:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi Juliancolton, I've been thinking about running for adminship within a month or two. If you're not too busy at the moment, could I please have some pointers? Thanks, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

'I Love MK Dons'

Hi,

Thanks for stopping 'I Love MK Dons' from Editing. Just to say he/she's added a section on my talk page calling me a idiot, probably because I'm a Reading fan.

Clyde1998 (talk) 13:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Communication Barnstar
		For your efforts to extend and improve the communication levels of Wikipedia, Ched would like to award you the Communication Barnstar.

hmm

I'm guessing it kind of makes my comments at WP:ADREV a bit obsolete huh? — Ched : ? 16:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Sure. Looks like over 4000 users are able to do so, why not me? =) Thegreatdr (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

MOTD

Would be gatreful if you have any ideas for mottos. Please help at WP:MOTD/N. Also see Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day#Archival Simply south (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

List of numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

Who gets to "speedy" delist this from FA? Most delists I've seen take weeks if not months. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Techinline Remote Desktop

Hello Juliancolton. You recently relisted my article for another deletion discussion and I just thought I'd touch base with you regarding how I can get it to remain on Wikipedia. I wrote a neutral article which doesn't contain one word of advertising, yet it was initially flagged for advertising purposes. I've just about eliminated all official sources (6 of 8 references used are reliable 3rd party references which you can check), yet I'm told that this is still not enough. I've referred to other posts on the same kinds of products written mostly by their companies' employees, and they all contain a number of official sources, yet their articles are allowed to stay. I'm looking for some fairness in this issue. My particular article was written with the goal of helping our service's users learn more about the technology used and the security barriers in place. In doing so, I've followed the format of other similar services such as LogMeIn and GoToMeeting. I value Wikipedia's role in being an informative and encyclopedic source of information, and I would be more than happy to contribute to this community. I can write additional contributions about the remote access industry and the available collaboration products, which I know very well. If this will help me to remain on Wikipedia, please let me know. I would be thrilled to become an asset to the Wikipedia community. Thank you, and I look forward to your response. Andrey4wiki (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

ITN

In light of the on-going discussion and lack of consensus about the Sotomayor nomination, could you remove it from the ITN template until there is a consensus to include it? User:Chaser promoted the item in the absence of any consensus and a contribution history that suggests a bias towards the topic. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Prodding an AfD'd article

Are you aware of this? SilkTork *^YES! 18:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Fred Martinez

Hi, Fred Martinez has a featured film documentary about him, I'm working on getting a copy. Could you userfy this to me? -- Banjeboi 20:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

K-stick's RfA and a favor?

Hi Julian,

Pardon me--I'm not so smart sometimes, and in a bit of a hurry the rest of today and tomorrow. I saw your nice comments on Kelapstick's RfA, and I know that you are a friendly admin who's always willing to help out a fellow editor (nudge nudge). K-stick has accepted the nomination, and I can't rightly figure out the next step. I see what I am supposed to do (add a line to the talk page and add the "edit stats"), but don't really get it--what are "edit stats"? I'm sure it's just some line of code that I just don't know about. And do I wait until he says "go ahead" before I go to step 9 (at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/nominate#To_nominate_someone_else)? If you can help me out here--or, if this is easy for you, if you can go ahead and do it--I'd really appreciate it. Thanks so much, Drmies (talk) 20:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Close AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

It looks like we've reached consensus. As an admin, can you close this AfD? just a little insignificant 21:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah. That makes complete and utter sense. Sorry for the trouble, I should take another look at AfD policy first. just a little insignificant 23:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Theophilus Thompson GA failure

Sorry, got caught up in a few things. I debated whether to remove the stub notice myself but thought twice. I guess it's still stub size at this point. No harm, no foul then. Thanks anyways. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Red link

I just don't like "redness"[15] on somebody's name (my superstition) :) --Caspian blue 23:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter XVII.V

This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.

Pool A

Shoemaker's Holiday (647)

Pool B

ThinkBlue (247)

Pool C

Theleftorium (455)

Pool D

Candlewicke (539)

Pool E

Durova (479)

Pool F

Sasata (961)

Current Wildcards

Useight (393)
Scorpion0422 (372)
Rlevse (329)
Wrestlinglover (307)
Paxse (285)
Ottava Rima (248)
Mitchazenia (226)
Juliancolton (181)
the_ed17 (179)
J Milburn (168)
Bedford (156)
Gary King (147)
97198 (142)
Ceranthor (111)
Tinucherian (106)
Matthewedwards (98)

GARDEN , iMatthew : Chat , and The Helpful One The Helpful Bot 00:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Leatherbag (band)

Hi Juliancolton. I had intended to contest the prod on this article – just somehow forgot to take the step of actually removing the tag. Oops. As you can see from the history, I had added some sources, and I thought on the whole it was likely notable enough for the general notability guideline. Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Much obliged. Cheers, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

RE: AfD

It does seem kind of silly, but I'll be first to admit: We've been "warring" over being the first to close AfD's. They don't even have a term for it: edit warring, wheel warring, none of them apply. Sorry if I came off as being a little snide here; on second thought, we probably should both wait the full 168 hours before closing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

WPOOK update - 05/27/2009

Input on the OOK threads at the Village Pump has died down (at both WP:VPP and WP:VPR), and there is currently no consensus on either.

Negative feedback

For the number of notices we posted (over a thousand) the number of complaints we received (the two VP threads mentioned above) was quite low.

Silent majority

Considering most of the outlines are orphans, they get pretty good use.

Note that people who are happy with articles on Wikipedia generally don't say anything, so I simply interpret it as positive feedback.

Traffic, traffic comparison, and increasing traffic

Using Traffic, I compare the traffic of articles, their corresponding outlines, and their corresponding portals from time to time.

Outlines are starting to catch up to portals. Though the main portals, which are included in a navbar menu at the top of most portals are still way ahead of their outline counterparts.

Both outlines and portals are way behind the articles on the same subjects. Articles usually have 20 to 30 times the traffic.

Keep in mind that most outlines are orphans, with the primary link to them being Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge.

Traffic should improve once we include links on the corresponding subject pages, including the main subject as well as subjects that correspond to subheadings (e.g., History of x, and in the case of countries: Geography of x, Demographics of x, Culture of x, etc.)

I'm convinced the traffic of outlines will overtake portals once we've link-integrated them into the encyclopedia. And since outlines serve as tables of contents for each subject, it seems most fitting to place links to them in the form of hatnotes at the top of each subject's main articles (and the sub-subjects mentioned in the paragraph directly above).

By the way, there's another traffic counter called Wikirank, but I haven't tested it out much yet, but will do so in the coming weeks.

Going for the Main Page

Once the traffic of outlines has overtaken portals, it will be time to replace portals on the Main Page, even if we need to spearhead a new main page redesign! This isn't a far-fetched idea. I was the one who jumpstarted and led the project responsible for the current main page design (until it hit critical mass and attracted other leaders), and I was also the most active editor on that project. I even created the WP:CBB on the Community Portal to promote the main page election. The second time around should be easier.

Back to the here and now

Targetting the Main Page is a few months off.

Right now, we need to continue posting notices and start link-integrating the OOK into the encyclopedia.

I have a whole slew of AWB tasks to assign. I hope you are ready. :)

Spread the word

WP:WPOOK needs members. Tell all your friends about the OOK, and get them to join.

The Transhumanist 02:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback#User:SchnitzelMannGreek

Hi Julian - could you take a look at the second request from this editor and my comments when you have a moment? Pedro : Chat 13:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Man - that was fast! Pedro : Chat 13:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

request for relist and undeletion-Optimal Thinking

Shameless thankspam

Hello Julian! Thank you so much for your support and comments in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. Flying Toaster

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Horning

For some odd reason, we always seem to be editing at exactly the same time. I just changed my !vote the same minute (16:46) that you closed it; perhaps you could reevaluate it with the change? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching

I have had several people say that you are one of the most prolific Coaches in Wikipedia. Therefore, I am in need of a coach and was wondering if you would be able to? Thanks for your time and consideration. Cheers!--~~Þέŗṃέłḥìμŝ~~ ^Life_Death 17:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, User:Permethius/Admin coaching--Þέŗṃέłḥìμŝ ^Life_Death 18:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Created the page--Þέŗṃέłḥìμŝ ^Life_Death 11:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Honoring a 'teen/tween crowd...IRC fun bunch' member who's written 19 featured articles and 58 good articles. Thanks for all you do, Julian. And everyone's a critic, eh? Maybe we should stop letting adults edit Wikipedia; they drag down the standards. ;) Durova^Charge! 19:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

AWB task: update link

Using AWB's "make list" feature, select "What links here" and create a list from User:The Transhumanist/Outline of knowledge.

On those pages, replace:

[[User:The Transhumanist/Outline of knowledge]]

with:

[[Wikipedia:Outlines]]

Thank you.

Good luck.

Have fun.

The Transhumanist 19:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

False negative

Try it again, paying close attention to letter cases and spelling.

And be sure not to include the brackets. Or the period. :)

The Transhumanist 19:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If that doesn't solve it, then it might be the redirect. Reset AWB to not bypass redirects, and then see if the make list works. Or specify [[Wikipedia:Outlines]] and see what happens. The Transhumanist 19:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

1941 Hurricane

No problem, glad to be able to help. If you'd like to see the text of any of the articles I reference, just send me an email. Also, I've found one absolutely horrible quality image (tucked into a news article). Personally, I think it's not even worth using it and bothering with a fair use rationale (it's truly awful quality), but if you'd like to see for yourself, once again send me an email. Cool3 (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hyde Park pic

Why thank you. That was quick!

I just wish I'd taken it on a sunnier morning. Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, consider this one, too. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, why not? You should probably make clear somehow that it's an NRHP listing, and make sure to use one that wouldn't go under "selected attraction" (where things like Montgomery Place should be). Daniel Case (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Latest Block

Wow, that was fast! I didn't even get to see his name on the AIV board! Great work.Drew Smith What I've done 04:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Real MacKay

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Real MacKay. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

senior editor

Hello! I have been experiencing some problems editing an article named 'Persian people' I have remarked that the article violates the standards of wikipedia and contains opinions and original research but a user named 'Tajik' refuses to let me edit the article and un-does my tag " the neutrality of this article is disputed' despite the fact that the discussion is not resolved in any way.

This is creating a democratic problem, how should I solve this? Is there any senior editor or admin for the article 'Persian people' How can I find out who to turn with my concerns?

I don't want to engage him in an editing conflict, nor do I want my voice silenced. I want Wikipedias standards to be enforced and my right to participate.

Thanks!

Danz23 (talk) 14:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: GA passed

Thanks JC :) I'll take you up on your offer for the pre-FA comments on Hurricane Kiko (1989). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Move/rename request

Please change Culture of Ancient Rus to Culture of ancient Rus.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 16:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:Good articles/recent

Hey Juliancolton. I would just to update you on some developments with the WP:Good articles/recent page. Following a bot request, it became apparent that it would be handy to have a bot pipe new additions to WP:GA onto the /recent subpage. Now, I admit that the bot's been having a few problems, but I hope these have now been worked out. It should mean that every 5 minutes the newest additions are added automatically, so all users like you have to do is add the newly listed GA to WP:GA and let the bot do the work. Of course, you're allowed to do it yourself, but you don't have to. Essentially though, you can either carry on as normal or take advantage of the bot, as you wish. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 17:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Real MacKay

I nominated this article for deletion and you closed the AfD as merge, which I believe was a sound decision based on the discussion. I subsequently nominated the sister article Northern Exposure (video blog) for merge, but this closed as keep (no consensus). Because of this inconsistency it seems to me better that neither article is merged so I have taken the article you closed to DRV to argue for reinstatement, and was advised I should have first discussed with you. So, belatedly, do you agree that the closure can be overturned to keep? I guess it's a kind of "nominator withdrawn" case - albeit later than usual. Thanks! I42 (talk) 19:25, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks! I42 (talk) 20:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Concerning DougsTech on WP:AN/I

I wish to suggest an alternative to DougsTech being blocked, and would wonder if they would be accepted. I don't want to have people accusing me of being a sockpuppet of him, so I thought I'd run the idea by you first. Just tell me if you want to see what I came up with.--Iner22 (talk) 19:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I put my suggestions on the thread.--Iner22 (talk) 20:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Juliancolton. You have new messages at User:Antivenin/Admin coaching.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I replied a few days back, so I figured I'd leave a talkback message. Cheers, Ant ive nin 22:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

It is done. Congrats on the new coachee btw. =) Ant ive nin 08:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do we have outlines in addition to...?

Wikipedia:Outlines was growing so large that I split this section off as a separate page.

I look forward to your feedback and improvements.

The Transhumanist 22:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Estonia–Malta relations

Hey, how's it going. I was recently asked by User:LibStar if I would like to do a deletion review of this article. You closed the discussion for what looked like a unanimous consensus for deletion here. I know that Libstar is baiting me (he nominated it for deletion). We have recently come into conflict over two other articles he nominated for deletion, Estonia–Luxembourg relations being discussed here and Emirati–Kosovan relations being discussed here. I'm getting a pretty strong reaction to some of my edits and arguments at the discussion of Estonia-Luxembourg (User:Stifle just called for me to be blocked). I must admit, the deletions make no sense to me, since the foreign relations of nation states are encyclopedic and notable and there seem to be sufficient sources to online to verify the existence of these relations. Anyway, I thought I'd ask your opinion about whether I should proceed into the maelstrom any further.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

You know, I was thinking about doing that myself. I have enough stress as it is. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 04:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

USA12345

Just to be completely fair, underneath the minor wikibashing, there did seem to be an intent to stop edit warring. He said he would go through the "wiki-beurocracy" and discuss on the talk page. I'm no admin, nor have I been around very long, but that sounds good enough to me... Just my 2 cents, not trying to bug you.Drew Smith What I've done 05:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Responded on my talk. Never did get the hang of using the talkback thing...Drew Smith What I've done 06:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Trustom Pond

On May 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Trustom Pond, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching Tyw7

I would like to have you to be my admin coach. I have ran for 4 failed RFAs. I have been for Wikipedia for over a year. If you would be interested in coaching me, that would be great! --Tyw7‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) Leading Innovations >>> 13:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Kitten

PirateSmackK^Arrrr! has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

this might be funny...

...but you'll have to look carefully, all the way down your revert of Army Medical Department (United States). Note, I'm not saying it shouldn't have been reverted, I know nothing of Army stuff, but there's something in the restoration that's not exactly kosher. ;) Later, Drmies (talk) 03:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Samuel Galindo

What were the reasons for keeping the article at this AfD? --Jimbo^[online] 11:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVIII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 14:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

Improve Tyw7

Any suggestions do you have so that I would have a successful RFA in the future? --Tyw7‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) Leading Innovations >>> 15:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge#Volunteers

I boldly went ahead and add your name to the Volunteer list here for the WikiProject, because I knew you did OoK work. If you wish, feel free to remove your name from the list