User talk:LFaraone/Archive/2014/January

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Go

Hi. Would you please care to have another quick look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Go (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)? I see that the closure acknowledged that the nomination was withdrawn after the posting of sources. However, the 2 delete !votes were not placed with knowledge of the existence of such sources, and therefore are (I believe) not subsequently valid under policy. I know that there would be no practical difference in a keep outcome, i.e. the article would still be kept. But the consensus evaluation appears somewhat inconsistent with other such debates and its presence may encourage others to close as NC under such circumstances. (In contrast, I see that you relisted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Courtney Chase (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).) Thanks for your time, and sorry to be a pain. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 08:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I've reopened the discussion. LFaraone 15:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

That's very helpful. Thank you. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 21:43, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again. The outcome was the same, so I'm sorry to have messed you around. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 17:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Merge?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free! (manga), the article content and sources don't appear to have been backed up in the history of the magazine article. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi:, can you clarify what you're requesting here? The debate was closed as delete as per the consensus on that page. LFaraone 04:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I thought the discussion was heading for merge, that the sourced content would be given a chance of merger move not just zapped. Not that I'm bothered, was only filling a hole in en.wp's coverage relative to ja.wp. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI closure

If you close an ANI discussion, where the result is a topic ban/editing restriction/1RR, than you have to notify the user. Otherwise they can claim, that they didn't know about it. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I assumed Echo notifications would fire, but an explicit notice is always better, agreed. I'll send a notice if one hasn't been left already. LFaraone 03:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow, I must have been really out of it today. My apologies. LFaraone 04:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Have a snack!

Happy New Year's, and thank you for closing the Johnny Squeaky discussion (or at least the Proposal part of it) at ANI. I was fairly worried that one would get auto-archived, so I appreciate the consensus being enacted. DonIago (talk) 05:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

DS review

I opened a discussion about whether or not to log alerts/notifications on the here. I'd be interested in hearing your views.  Roger Davies ^talk 19:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Suppressions

If you were the one suppressed all those edits at AN, thank you. I have been berating myself not to have warned in my initial post against outing, but I thought it was policy anyway. I should undoubtedly have then got out my revdelete tool when I saw someone had gone and done it ... apologies for not doing so. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Wrapping up the Kafziel case

Your vote would be appreciated on the Conduct unbecoming FOF to enable us to close the case.  Roger Davies ^talk 10:09, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Unblock on hold

I see here that an unblock that you placed on hold on 10 November 2013 is still waiting. Perhaps you could look into it, and see whether anything has been decided? JamesBWatson (talk) 15:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

You pinged

You pinged me in the discussion where I made two comments and are not allowed more. What can I say? Did you see that we make progress in discussions? (I gave an example, but there are more.) Future discussions are a good idea. I would think that until then some fairness would be nice. Therefore I tried to make life easier for Andy. The simple answer could have been "why not", why should he not add infoboxes to his articles. (They often got reverted anyway, I could give you details. If consensus of the community were against one, it would disappear quickly, trust me.) - Imagine you wanted to paint and prefer blue, and some authority told you "you are not permitted to use blue". - Blue duck was my topic today. I miss 28bytes, who wrote on waste of time. Please feel free to ask questions, I don't want to waste your time ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)