User talk:MrScorch6200/2013 August

Note to myself: Organize talk sessions

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Simpsons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kindle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Some baklava for you!

As a Turkish custom, here's your Baklava :) Enjoy! Videogamer319 (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the pastry! I am starving right now so I could use it! MrScorch6200 (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

no content

an infobox can be content--the one on Keenan Davis just needs rewriting in sentences. Please check WP:CSD for the actual criteria for speedy deletion. DGG ( talk ) 18:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Generally, a biography should have content about biographical information on the subject (not just player stats). Statistical information, such as date and place of birth, information on historical significance (N/A here), pictures, and information on accomplishments is usually accepted as the content of a biography on Wikipedia. What we have here are some of Keenan Davis' NFL stats. The page should be written from his childhood/early years up to how he got into the NFL and what he did to get there (such as being in minor leagues), like any normal biography.

I understand your point on how infoboxes can be content, but in this situation what we have is a biography with just NFL stats. How can we consider that a biography? MrScorch6200 (talk) 18:23, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

A1/A3 tag for NBEO

Hey, MrScorch, I just wanted to let you know that I declined your CSD nomination of the NBEO article. You nominated it under A1 (no context) and A3 (no content), but the article isn't really that close to meeting either criterion; it's pretty clear what the subject of the article is, and it isn't actually empty. If there are other reasons to delete it (there certainly may be), feel free to bring it up at AfD, but just having little content or no references isn't enough for CSD on its own. Thanks, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

complaint

I'll be making complaint about you @MrScorch, @RHaworth and @Cindamuse. Collectively your actions are pack-dog style harassment and vandalism. Hopefully at the end of complaining about your actions, articles as popular as Sumo (which collectively bring in about 1 million hits a year) will not be treated with contempt, based on ignorance, by administrators, like @MrScorch, @RHaworth and @Cindamuse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leveni (talk • contribs) 03:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I am in no way affiliated with the dispute over this article, I was just warning you about removing articles for deletion notices/tags by following Wikipedia policy. Also, please sign your comments. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I had already been warned by @RHaworth and @Cindamuse. You are the 3rd to warn me after RHaworth's vandalism. To warn somebody three times by different moderators/administrators after the event, is harassment by the moderators/administrators.Leveni 03:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry about warning you for a third time, but the other two were not formal warnings so I didn't notice. Just remember when trying to save your article, stay civil. I wish you luck. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

This is what I submitted to the Admin notice board [Link]. Although I mentioned no names, the policy said I had to notify all those involved. Leveni--Leveni (talk) 06:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Good luck. MrScorch6200 (talk) 06:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I myself want to delete it. Muhammad Mohsin Farooq (talk) 07:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks? What's this in reference to? MrScorch6200 (talk) 07:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind, I know what it is in reference to now. Thanks! MrScorch6200 (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Your Over Involvement

MrScorch6200,

Your false accusations regarding C.K.S are extremely discouraging as these are psychological findings on me and my investigative partner. Please refrain from any other comments or from any infringement what-so-ever on the C.K.S. Wikipedia page. If you have any questions or are generously intrigued about C.K.S. i would be happy to message you or exchange emails with you on our findings. Thanks, C.K.S research department. W.M.B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradley4104 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I did a Google search of 'CKS' and the full name, and turned up nothing. CKS is a hoax and has no business on an encyclopedia. Also if they are your findings, that would be original research and would be deleted from Wikipedia. If you can find a source on CKS, please add it to its page. MrScorch6200 (talk) 07:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I did a Google search of 'MrScorch' and it showed a sorry lonely man with nothing better to do than ruin other peoples Wikipedia pages, and is too lazy and nonproductive to produce a Wikipedia page of any worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradley4104 (talk • contribs) 08:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

My purpose here on Wikipedia is not as an editor, but to deal with people like you. (And you forgot to mention that I'm doing this at 4am where I live). I love how you said that I am too lazy to produce a Wikipedia page of any worth, while you are creating hoaxes. MrScorch6200 (talk) 08:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Monella (film)

Do whatever you want with it for I don't fucking care. Been around here for 8 years I'm really fed up with the likes of you. Behemoth (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what your problem is, but for whatever I did I'm sorry that it angered you. Please remember to stay civil. WP:CIVIL MrScorch6200 (talk) 17:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mne ne nuzhna informatsiya may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{issues|{{unreferenced|date=August 2013}}{{copy edit|date=August 2013|for=shouting}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

What does Isaiah 9:10 blah blah blah...

I didn't even think about blanking it been off the pedia to long thanks for the rebound play there. Whispering 22:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Also, welcome back! I hope you stay a little while. See you around. MrScorch6200 (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Response to your gratitude

If I would have not been busy greeting everyone I would have thanked you first, either way, just responding to your gratitude and giving you mine. If you don't mind, I will sent any questions that I will get from them to you, is it fine?--Mishae (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure that's fine! What's this in reference to, though? MrScorch6200 (talk) 23:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hm, what kind of reference?--Mishae (talk) 23:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You said, "If you don't mind, I will sent (send) any questions that I will get from them to you, is it fine?"

Is that in reference to new users? MrScorch6200 (talk) 23:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Sometimes, I greet them, but when questions arise, I am stuck.--Mishae (talk) 23:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, if you need any help or want to redirect new users to me that's fine! I appreciate your ambition. If a new user asks you a question and you are unable to help them, just redirect them to my talk page and I will be glad to help them. Thanks a lot. MrScorch6200 (talk) 23:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Check my talkpage, I have one waiting for you!--Mishae (talk) 23:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll respond to that now. Thanks and I'll see you around. MrScorch6200 (talk) 23:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, can you move the discussion from my page to his? I think he will respond there.--Mishae (talk) 23:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure that's fine. I'll get to it now.

Thanks for that and the award. As a person with autism its an honour for me to receive a team work award. Considering that its hard for me to be a team player. I will sent you more guys in a future, and will admire any gratitude or award from you.--Mishae (talk) 00:12, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You are very welcome, Misha, and that comment really means a lot to me. I wish you luck on Wikipedia. If you need any help with anything feel free to leave a message on my talkpage. I'll see you around. MrScorch6200 (talk) 00:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You what really means to me? Is that someone called me by my real name, not by my user name. Tell you story: I added e in November 2009 account creation, because it the system didn't wanted me to be logged in as my actual name (apparently a bug). So I stayed...--Mishae (talk) 00:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

:)

P.S. Check my user page, I added you to my collapsible template "My friends on Wikipedia." ~Your friend, MrScorch6200 (talk) 01:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Question, if a user have a profane user name like: User talk:HoLeeeFukImSoFukinHi to whom should I turn?--Mishae (talk) 01:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll take care of him for you. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. MrScorch6200 (talk) 01:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, feel free to go over my contributions I have one more somewhere. By the way found another odd one: User talk:Seetha Poornachand the last name sounds like Porn to me.--Mishae (talk) 02:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the user you told me about got a username block and I also found the other user that you are talking about. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

O' and don't hesitate to give me a ping if you will get someone whom you can't help, like someone with a disability or the like. :) By the way, whats your your actual name? Mine you already know. :) Yep, that's the guy that I was looking for:

• User talk:Eatmya55andshutthefuckup--Mishae (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

As soon as those users with bad user names will be deleted from our system, can you delete them from your talkpage so that the other users wont recreate them?--Mishae (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok I'll keep that in mind. :) My real name is Nicholas. You can view that on my userpage: user:MrScorch6200. Other users cannot recreate blocked usernames because the usernames are never really removed from the system, they are just blocked so no one can recreate that username. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

O' and if by any change you will stumble on users that use Cyrillic alphabet, feel free to give them to me since I speak more then one Slavic languages. :) P.S. Time for chicken. Be back soon!--Mishae (talk) 02:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I know the Cyrillic alphabet, but I don't fully understand it. Thanks for the help. Also, I speak German as a secondary language, so if you come across any German speaking users feel free to direct them to me. Enjoy your chicken! MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Back in business! Just came back from my dinner 10 minutes ago, and found this:

• User talk:Pattraporn.namwong--Mishae (talk) 03:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

And those ones:

• User talk:Rockhardcock
• User talk:Effa Dias--Mishae (talk) 04:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I have taken care of them. If you have any other usernames to report to me please add them to the "Usernames to report" section below. Thanks again. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

By the way, you mention that you hate Apple/Mac computers? You know, can't blame you. I use PC for everything too. I think Linux is the same as Mac, even though, yes, it probably have tons of upgrades, but is still hard to figure out which upgrade (version) is the newest! :)--Mishae (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Haha thanks for the support!

Resolved

Usernames to report or deal with

Please add usernames below. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

We have a special section for this kind of thing - more information at Wikipedia:Username policy. Creating such a list here would conflict with WP:POLEMIC. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

New Page Patrol

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. However, please try to be a bit more tolerant, especially when you have seen that an admin has already made a comment that has had the desired effect. See: User talk:Dwarapureddy Praveen Kumar. For more information on patrolling new pages please see WP:NPP and WP:Deletion. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand, everything but the welcome message was from me. MrScorch6200 (talk) 05:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't notice your comment (I didn't look at his talkpage until after I tagged the page). Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

- that's why the rapid tagging was OTT. Please also remember that we use an incremental system of user warnings before reporting vandalism to AIV. Please avoid biting newcomers - you're relatively new here yourself. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Just to clear up any confusion, I rapid tagged because a few minutes after that page was deleted, I went back to the Special:NewPagesFeed and found the same article listed. MrScorch6200 (talk) 05:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

There are articles, such as Jane Ash Poitras, where a well aimed PROD is likely to bear better fruit than a CSD. It doesn't matter who got the deletion proposal in first, what matters is the route that is likely to be best for WIkipedia. In this case she is an artist. It was obvious that it was likely to be expanded if we PRODded the creating editor, PROviDed a good rationale was given. She looks like the type of artist we might well want in the encyclopaedia.

I am not complaining or whining that you removed my PROD. I just see how new you are to this and wanted to guide your hand a little. We are not here to delete, we are here to improve. Part of improvement is the way we handle proposals for any style of deletion. Fiddle Faddle 07:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion is one thing, but do you not think you're being a little hasty. Jane Anne Poitras was created at 01:41, 21 August 2013and was proposed for deletion at 1:44. I've been around for a while, so it's not like I'm going to get discouraged or anything, but I can see how a newbie would wonder what the heck is going on. Dhodges (talk) 07:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I think it is a matter of degree. As I noted above, this article was likely to be expanded. CSD was a less than perfect choice. It is a violent route for very specific lacks in an article. Now it cold be argued that JAP had these lacks, but judgment is also required. A well aimed PROD gives advice and also gives time. Both commodities are valuable. Fiddle Faddle 07:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Thanks

Thanks, at least you haven't got any of my pages yet! (: I changed some of the vandalism tags where it seemed to me to kids/newbies/idiots rather than deliberate hoaxes or misinformation in the (misguided) hope that they might come back with something useful one day Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll see you around. MrScorch6200 (talk) 17:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

NPR Radio

---

I'm sorry you find a host of one of the most popular national radio shows to be non significant. Your judgment will rob wikipedia of furthering itself as an information source and personally has resulted in me using google as a source to legitimate sites such as the sites I quoted - Pittsburg Gazette - to find information on interesting subjects. I saw no issue choosing a user name related to an interest and have no personal or professional affiliation with NPR (as an American and tax payer, my public national radio). Furthermore if you searched wikipedia you would see the subject David Greene is mentioned already in Wikipedia but is the only host without his own bio background.

I hope you can repost the article since I will not be wasting further effort with this and simply improve upon it rather than delete it and other users articles in the future.

16:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)NPRMorningfan — Preceding unsigned comment added by NPRMorningfan (talk • contribs)

Just as a note, this page was tagged as copyright infringement and subsequently deleted by an administrator. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy tagging of Kotabommali Railway station

Hi. You tagged Kotabommali Railway station for deletion as a duplicate of Sompeta Railway station. I'm confused. How is this so? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

If you look at both of those pages, you can see that it was most likely copy and pasted from Sompeta to Kotabommali, duplicating the content (except for the duplicated "Railway reorganization" sections in Sompeta, the names, and they also have the same page author). Also see MadmanBot's post here: User talk:Dwarapureddy Praveen Kumar (towards the bottom). If you decide to correct the page yourself, as the author is currently blocked for the next 11 hours, then leave the speedy deletion tag down and go for it. If not, it should be re-posted. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

A tiny bit is duplicated. We're talking about train stations on the same line. It's fine to copy paste a bit in this case. He could have attributed it, but that's asking too much. But look at the infobox. The coords etc are different. I really don't think it was appropriate to speedy tag that as a duplicate.

By the way, I blocked that user. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 18:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Sorry

Hi, I saw you got yourself into a hot water with Kudpung. Please except my apologies. If its not hard and is (probably) OK with you and Kudpung if such conversations we will have over Skype?--Mishae (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

That's fine by me, but I only feel comfortable using messages than video calls. My name on Skype is mrscorh6200. Thanks MrScorch6200 (talk) 20:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm known for not mincing my words, but the effort in the brevity of my messages, which lack audio and visual cues, is always to help and encourage rather than to evoke 'hot water' ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Unfounded Accusations of Vandalism

Good day, MrScorch2600.

I am The Almighty Atheist. You may remember recently deleting a contribution of mine to the article entitled Equestria Girls, and sending to me a complaint about vandalism. Before this discussion is continued any further, let us establish the definition of 'vandalism' as determined by Wikipedia:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page.

My contribution to the page in question was concise and straightforward. A single sentence was added to the "Reception" section of the article, citing the commentary of a critical article about the film in question, with a link provided to that article. It is for this purpose that a "Reception" section exists on a Wikipedia page about a film, and the contribution provided is not dissimilar to any of the other contributions provided in that section. The purpose of a "Reception" section is to provide readers with a range of critical opinions with regard to the film in question, with links provided to the source articles.

The assertion that this contribution constitutes Wikipedia vandalism is, in light of the quote provided above, unequivocal nonsense. In no way could the contribution in question be construed as vandalism; having read the entire article concerning Wikipedia vandalism, I am aware of the existing criteria. Indeed, the same page states that all contributions should be assumed to be in good faith, unless there is substantial evidence to the contrary. It is not the intention of Wikipedia that accusations of vandalism be issued on a whim.

You post on your user page: "I have recently gained an interest in patrolling newly created pages and tagging them for issues and deletion". It would appear that this applies to new contributions to older pages, as well. I have received not one, but two, messages about vandalism from your account. Your more recent message, astoundingly, reads: "Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at My Little Pony: Equestria Girls, you may be blocked from editing." It would seem that you, assuming that the first message did not provide quite enough information, felt the need to reinforce the notion that my "disruptive" editing and "vandalism", as you put it, could see my account compromised. This trigger-happy approach to moderation is in clear breach of the guidelines provided by Wikipedia in their article about vandalism. If you discern a specific issue with a contribution, by all means inform the editor in question so that their contribution can be improved. Please refrain from denouncing a contribution as vandalism when there is clearly no attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.

In response to this issue, I request that you retract any claims of vandalism that you have made concerning my account; if it is not possible to retract these claims, please make a further post on my talk page indicating that the messages that you posted there about vandalism are to be disregarded. I would also appreciate the restoration of my contribution to the Equestria Girls page, unless there is a specific issue that you have identified with the contribution, in which case I would like to know what this issue is.

Thank you for your assistance.

Yours sincerely,

~ The Almighty Atheist

The Almighty Atheist (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Before I start, I would like to say three things: I did not revert your edit, user:Masem did, and I added warning templates to your talk page, which are pre-made warnings not in my own words, and I reported your username because I take offense to it.

I was under the impression that you had added that edit twice, so I posted two warnings on your talkapge. That's bad on my part and I hope you accept my apology.

I should not have tagged that for vandalism (I took it as vandalism), but just WP:AGF. You also said to restore your edit to the "Equesria Girls" page, you should take that up with the editor who reverted your edits, not me. He said it was, "COI, non-notable reviewer," Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:32, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) While your edit was not vandalism, it was clearly inappropriate for other reasons, namely adding information from something that is probably your own blog is not only adding info from an unreliable source, but it also represents a conflict of interest. Your contribution will not be restored for these reasons. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 02:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

As discussed above, a "Reception" section in a Wikipedia article about a film is intended to provide varied critical commentary, with reference to specific critical articles. Such articles are, in this context, not an unreliable source, the purpose of the section in question being to showcase critical opinion, not objective fact, as long as those critical opinions are marked as such and are given clear citations. I have read the Wikipedia guidelines on conflict of interest, and I do not see that this contribution is in breach of those guidelines, or is in any way deceptive in the context of the section of the article in question. The Almighty Atheist (talk) 03:08, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

My username is not in breach of the Wikipedia username policy, nor does it contain any profanity or defamatory content. The fact that it may not conform to your personal ideology does not warrant taking action against my account. The Almighty Atheist (talk) 03:08, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I flagged your username as offensive. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Please see WP:IU, "The following types of usernames are not permitted because they are disruptive or offensive:

... Usernames that are likely to offend other contributors...". Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:21, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

As you have provided no explanation as to why the username is offensive, you are essentially saying that it is offensive because it is offensive, which is circular logic and not an adequate basis for reporting a username as inappropriate. The Almighty Atheist (talk) 04:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Scorch, I don't think you have a strong case about the username being offensive, mostly because I don't think the username will offend the vast majority of users. Many users use the term "Atheist" in their username [1]. You should consider removing that category on their userpage. The issue is not their username. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 03:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) AA, your review is hosted on blogspot, a website where anybody can make an account and write anything. WP:SELFCITE does not apply here because the source provides no evidence that you have a notable reputation a reviewer. Your point about your commentary being critical, no matter how much depth it goes into, is not reasonable grounds for inclusion. If you want to disagree with me about whether your inclusion conflicts with COI, that's fine, but unfortunately, you are in the wrong. Even if you are not adding it for promotional reasons, you should never add in content you wrote yourself because you cannot judge yourself to be a reliable source. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 03:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

In light of your response, Jethrobot, I will refrain from resubmitting my contribution to the "'Equestria Girls'" page. I do not believe that a conflict of interest exists in this case, as the contribution in question was made for the improvement of the article by providing information relevant to the section in which it was posted (that is to say, critical opinion with regard to the film), not for promotional purposes. However, if Wikipedia policy requires that users do not cite their own publications, I will aim to apply this policy when making future contributions to the site. If you would like to clarify any further points, you are welcome to post a further query. Otherwise, you may consider this matter resolved. Thank you for your assistance. The Almighty Atheist (talk) 04:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Let me say something here. Yes, Wikipedia prohibits users to publish their own publications, its called Original Research.--Mishae (talk) 04:31, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Absurd talk page message

You basically said on my talk page that I should not object to another editor applauding a vandal for a BLP violation, and giving him "thanks" and a warm "welcome" for his unrefrenced edit stating that a living person is a "porn star." Please give a careful reading to WP:BLP.Your accusation that I did not "assume good faith" is ill founded. Regards. Edison (talk) 03:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

No, I told you to assume good faith for Mishae's welcome to that user. It was not his intention to welcome a vandal. Please give a careful reading to WP:AGF. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

If it was "not his intention to welcome a vandal" then why did he welcome a vandal and thank him for his contribution which violated WP:BLP? Yes, it upped his edit count. But it worked to the detriment of the project. Edison (talk) 04:09, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

That probably happened because when using Twinkle, if you go to a user talkpage from an article (by going to the history and clicking the username) and click welcome the user (in Twinkle), it automatically enters the article name into "linked article". This results into the welcome message welcoming the vandal for their contributions to said article. This discussion is all just a big misunderstanding. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

When you add content to a user's talk page, please create a new header. Otherwise, your comment appears to be related to the previous thread. Edison (talk) 04:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

That's a result of using Twinkle, it automatically does that, but it's still my fault and thank you for bringing it to my attention. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Wait, is that last comment from Edison directed to me? I'm a bit confused. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Kindly do not revert my edits to my own talk page, in which I created a header for your complaint to distinguish it from the complaint of another editor about an unrelated topic. Edison (talk) 04:34, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree to your revert, since there is now a discussion on that complaint. MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Sorry you are feeling confused. Kindly do not revert my edits to my own talk page, in which I created a header for your complaint to distinguish it from the complaint of another editor about an unrelated topic. Saying "Twinkle" is not a universal excuse for failure to take a look at what is being edited and at what edits immediately preceded one's own edit. The BLP vio I initially complained about had been labelled as a possible BLP violation by a robotic filter. That should have been a clue. .Edison (talk) 04:34, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I know, I already explained that I take responsibility for Twinkle's actions, and that I now agree with the revert since there is now a separate discussion (both explained above). MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Twinkle concerns.

Scorch-- it seems there have been a lot of mistakes made in your use of Twinkle recently. I'm not saying that these were intentional. However, some of them do seem to indicate that you may want to check policies before engaging users about edits you are concerned about. My concern stems from recent issues on this talk page such as not templating the regulars, not differentiating vandalism from other problematic edits, and inappropriately listing articles for speedy deletion. I know you are taking responsibility, but you may want to consider backing off from Twinkle until you can make these decisions more accurately without it. The decision is ultimately yours, but if more issues come up in the future, you may find your Twinkle privileges revoked. Tread carefully. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

As I am a relatively new editor, I am still learning all of the policies and customs of Wikipedia (I never heard of don't template the regulars), so thanks for the information and suggestions. I will take them into consideration the next time I use Twinkle. However, I don't agree with your reasoning on me inappropriately tagging articles for WP:CSD; I see your reasoning, but this was maybe three or four articles inappropriately tagged out of many, so I see a good decision rate. (But then again that's just an opinion). Thanks again. MrScorch6200 (talk) 05:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)And your issues with CSD continue even now. Ant Simpson clearly contained a reliable source when you nominated it for speedy deletion here, let alone that you nominated it exactly one minute after it was created. It doesn't matter that it contained references to other articles on Wikipedia at first (they have since been removed). Not only was this another inappropriate speedy deletion candidate, but surely, you must see how this kind of behavior is unnecessarily harsh to new users who are trying to figure out how to create articles. What if you had created an article with a reliable source and someone came and slapped a speedy deletion template on your article? Wouldn't you attempt to make the same kind of appeal that the editor did who said, ...I am in the process of refining the article and providing proper references. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

First of all, new editors should read tutorials such as WP:YFA to avoid these problems. Also, new articles should be created in the sandbox to also avoid these types of issues (reference issues in particular), and should be posted at WP:AFC. If an admin thinks that the tag is inappropriate (or another editor), then they won't delete the page and will remove the tag. Furthermore, if I did create an article, I would follow all policies and post it at Articles For Creation to avoid these problems. I haven't created an article yet because I'm still getting familiar with all of the policies. Your reasonings are flawed and you should rethink your approach about this.

ex. You said that I'm biting newcomers, can't I turn on you and say that you're biting newcomers (me)? But that would just be pointing fingers and that's what I'm not here to do. MrScorch6200 (talk) 06:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know why you made that comparison about biting at all if you're not here about pointing fingers. I am simply bringing a concern that others have previously brought up; I like your enthusiasm in your work here, but I do not want to see you get so carried away that too many mistakes get made. I agree that WP:YFA and WP:AFC are great resources. However, many new editors don't see those (at least not right away). You have to consider their situation a bit more. Not all new editors are like you, and that is OK. Keep in mind we encourage editors to be bold (within reason). Yes, many articles from new users that start in the mainspace get deleted, but many are not and should not be deleted. What is not OK is to make repeated, inappropriate CSD nominations because it shows you do not understand the nomination criteria, it wastes time for administrators, and it sometimes means that articles get deleted when they should not be. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 07:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand your reasoning, but ultimately it is an administrator's decision if a page gets deleted or not. I really don't see how this is wasting admins' time since this is part of their duty on Wikipedia (but of course ultimately they could spend it doing something better (and perhaps we are looking at a new user permission that allows users to delete tagged pages similar to the way admins can?)). Also, I noticed that a lot of users use the WP:WIZ to create articles. On that page, it gives a direct link to Wikipedia:tutorial and WP:YFA. I understand how you said that most users do not see these resources, but obviously it is just their ignorance and they don't take Wikipedia seriously, such as you and I. The community should also do something about helping new editors create better articles before they are actually introduced into the encyclopedia, and having some type of restriction on new users so that they edit articles first and then are allowed to create articles (this would also weed out promotional pages and would give editors experience before they create articles). Thanks for watching over me. MrScorch6200 (talk) 08:10, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand your enthusiasm to jump right in and help control the quality of Wikipedia pages, but strangely, New Page Patrol which needs no special user right unlike Rollabacker and PC Reviewer, does need a lot of experience and we need to get it right because it's mainly your judgement if an article needs to be tagged, and if for deletion, which criterion to use. It can waste a lot of admin time untangling wrong tags, because wrong tags often send the wrong message to the users and all this has to be undone and sometimes even apologised for. Please take a moment to read up on WP:NPP and WP:Deletion because we have some very firm guidelines and policies that should be observed. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) To be fair, every one of us makes mistakes. The trick is working hard to make fewer and fewer. But, unless we make them, learning from them is impossible. I've been here a few years and still sometimes misjudge a speedy deletion nomination. It happens. Let's lead MrScorch6200 forward happily and recognise that he wants to do a hugely useful job as well as he can today and better than that tomorrow. We need more folk who are passionate about quality. IN the global scheme of things a few mistakes don't matter because he is not an admin (nor am I, and I have no wish to be), and a second set of eyes views his (and my) CSD nominations. Yes, a few folk have the ability to become upset, but that is relatively low as a cost for a good and improving NPP person and community member. Fiddle Faddle 10:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your input, guys, especially user:Timtrent. Haha I guess talk page stalkers really are friendly! When I came to Wikipedia about a month ago, I asked myself, "There is really a lot to do here, what do I what to do here?" (of course my first thought was administrator!) But about three weeks later I saw that there are very few WP:NPP patrollers here, and that's what I want to be here to do, so I started to patrol pages. I don't want the spam and advertising and everything else that shouldn't be in an encyclopedia to get into Wikipedia, just quality encyclopedic articles. I Jethrobot and Kudpung you need to remember that experience comes from hard work, determination, and making mistakes. You also have to remember that every expert started out as a beginner. Maybe someday a few years from now I'll be an admin, but an admin that focuses mainly on WP:NPP. Thanks again you three. MrScorch6200 (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

It's always worth listening to advice and using the worthwhile parts. If every decision you make improves then you are getting it right. When you admit you have made a genuine error, then you are getting it right (even if you simply admit it to yourself). The only thing to take personally on Wikipedia is praise. Fiddle Faddle 17:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Www.facebook.com/tufani.speaker

Per CSD AI: "Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article". Last sentence of the article clearly states: "Saleem Tufani is a poet and wrote ghazals. Wrote articles in different newspapers and also a senior script writer of Pakistan.". -SFK2 (talk) 06:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

That page was just tagged for deletion by the author. MrScorch6200 (talk) 06:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

And Harsh, Rishi Valley is by all definitions an attack page. Perhaps you should read up on the criteria before going any further. -SFK2 (talk)

I don't think that it's an attack page. It doesn't threaten or harass the topic in any way. All that it is is an inappropriate page, therefore I tagged it as G3. I understand how this can be controversial, but let's leave the article at where it is now (tagged G10 by you) and see if an admin accepts or rejects the SD tag. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 06:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

See below. MrScorch6200 (talk) 07:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Harsh, Rishi Valley

FWIW I just deleted it as both attack page and vandalism. I've also left a very clear warning on the user's talk page - it often pays to check the editing history of users who create strange pages. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. MrScorch6200 (talk) 07:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm XapApp. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Bokido (martial art), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. ~XapApp(Talk·Contribs) 12:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Puzzling CSD

In this edit] you tagged the article Black Rock Mountain Bike Area as a CSD G7, stating that the original author had blanked it or requested its deletion. I see no evidence of such a request or deletion. Did you intend to use lack of claimed notability as the CSD reason? OK I found the request on his talk page. Usually they just blank the article. Sorry for the confusion. Carry on. Regards, and thanks for your efforts to watch over new pages. Edison (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern, and I'm sorry about any confusion. MrScorch6200 (talk) 19:14, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Poornachand

You left a username warning in this edit [2] that the name "Poornachand" sounds like "porn." Please be aware that "Poorna" and "Poornachand" are actually the names of some people, as you will find from a people search on Google. They are used in South Asian countries.In Thailand, even "porn" is a common part of names. Please consider removing your username warnng from the page cited. Thanks for your efforts to keep unacceptable usernames out of Wikipedia. Regards, Edison (talk) 02:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I was not aware that it is an actual name. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy deletion declined: Chimeric RNA

Hello MrScorch6200. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Chimeric RNA, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 doesn't apply to RNA. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy deletion nomination of Ricard Malley

I saw your message about speedy deletion, I will begin working on the page. I request a week or so timetable to complete this task, thank you. Mostly home (talk) 02:46, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Please take a look at your user page. user:Dlohcierekim changed it to WP:PROD. Please talk with him and not me. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 02:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Article sent to AfD (next step after PROD). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:17, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. MrScorch6200 (talk) 03:19, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Unresolved

/

Stale

Speedy deletion request declined

You nominated Thom Wall for speed deletion under the A7 criterion. However, that list of awards easily constitutes a credible claim of significance. I see some other speedy deletion declines here. I suggest you hold off on doing any more of this type of work until you are more familiar with the criteria. LadyofShalott 03:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Alos, regarding the username FagusNigra which you called offensive, Fagus is the genus of beech trees, and nigra is a species epithet. While there is no species, Fagus nigra, this seems more likely to be a play on scientific nomenclature than derogatory of any demographic groups. LadyofShalott 03:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

And Jaroslav miller? You nominated it under the A2 criterion, but it is in English! Can you please explain what you were thinking? LadyofShalott 03:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

My question here was not rhetorical. Please respond. LadyofShalott 17:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I have just declined your A7 nomination of Keerio. The article clearly states that it is one of the largest tribes of a region. That is a claim of significance. Remember that the bar for claim of significance is deliberately far below that required for actual WP:Notability. LadyofShalott 17:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Your edits

Please be more careful with your reverts. Here you are inserting vandalism back to the article for a second time. Widr (talk) 13:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry, I actually thought that I was taking it out of the article. The "compare selected revisions" can be a bit confusing sometimes. Now I feel stupid. Thanks again. MrScorch6200 (talk) 13:37, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries, happens to us all. :-) Widr (talk) 13:43, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Guðrún P. Helgadóttir

Hello. I was recently creating my first Wikipedia entry. It was on a very notable individual in Iceland, Guðrún P. Helgadóttir, who is also known outside the country for her scholarly work. I got an immediate notification that the article was recommended for deletion. However, it is not an article on an living person (which was mistakenly mentioned) and I have added more information and references to demonstrate notability. I would appreciate if you could let me know whether this was sufficient. The reason I started this entry about Guðrún P. Helgadóttir was that I came across an error in a reference from another Wikipedia entry on Guðrún's adviser in Oxford - Gabriel Turville-Petre. In the references in his page someone had wrongly referred to Guðrún Helgadóttir which I corrected to Guðrún P. Helgadóttir and then decided to add a new page about the correct person. (Guðrún Helgadóttir was also an Icelandic writer but of children's literature). Next step is probably to add an entry about Guðrún P. Helgadóttir in the Icelandic wikipedia where I am sure nobody would dream of complaining about a notability problem. I hope, however, that she can also have an entry in the English version. Solkate (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The references and info that you added are now sufficient for the article, and thanks for correcting the error. I'm also sorry about any confusion on if it was a BLPPROD tag. If you have any other questions don't hesitate to ask me here or any other editor. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 16:06, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Navot Papushado

Is there a need for more reliable sources? If so - they can easily be provided. Zaevet (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw that you added a couple of references, so I removed the BLPPROD tag for you. Thanks. MrScorch6200 (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Zaevet (talk) 19:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! MrScorch6200 (talk) 04:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Contributions

Have you seen my contributions for today? How many do I have? By the way, how come Skype is not on?--Mishae (talk) 00:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Stale