Revision as of 15:25, 30 September 2012

Archives

2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012

Please add all new material to the bottom of the page or click here.

Congratulations, you are an administrator!

Hello De728631! I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Earning 100% support of your peers is an impressive feat, for which I congratulate you. There's plenty of helpful information about the administrative toolkit at Misplaced Pages:New admin school, but if you have any questions at all, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page and ask. Happy editing, and happy adminning! 28bytes (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Thank you, everyone, for your support! I shall now get myself a jump suit and a bucket to use my new mop. De728631 (talk) 22:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

A belated congratulations! Thanks for deleting the attack page that I tagged, Cody pigeon! Electric Catfish 00:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. De728631 (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Congrats! You handled yourself exceptionally well, removing all doubt that you were ready for the job. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Well done! Congratulations! --j⚛e decker 03:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't around to say this when it happened (this whole "having a full time job" malarkey is playing havoc with my wikipedia and sleep time) but congratulations!!! Never doubted you for a second. Now, time to go to work: You start blocking all admins starting with the letter A and work your way up, I'll start with the letter Z and work my way down, we'll soon rule this place :D--Jac16888 16:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Apologies

If my tagging the Dr. Rafie Hamidpour, PH.D., D.E., DABFE article you just deleted caused any problems, I didn't realise you had already deleted it until I attempted to revert myself when I realised it was just self promotion. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 15:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I didn't notice anything and my reason for deleting the page was also CSD G11, unambiguous advertising or promotion. De728631 (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Good luck as a sysop! Bearian (talk) 16:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Why, thank you. Going to enjoy that cookie with a cup of coffee. :) De728631 (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

File:JRR Tolkien signature - from Commons.svg

The Commons discussion is absurd — a few letters are too simple for copyright — and even if the arguments held water, it would be standard practise to tag the image with {{Do not move to Commons}} and then to continue using it here without restrictions. Nyttend (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Here is one I commented on in April and they still haven't made a decision on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
  • See also this. De728631 (talk) 22:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

User:The Cosins Flim Industries

Hi there, I have reason to believe that User:The Cosins Flim Industries who you just blocked, is the same person as User:Mustafa Flim Industries, based on the fact that Cosin recreated the previously deleted article Anokhe. I'm just wondering what can be done to prevent this account from being recreated? Iamthemuffinman (talk) 15:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

They do quack a lot, so I'd also say that this is sockpuppetry. Please feel free to file an official SPI to confirm it. Recreation of other accounts can't really be prevented but if it happens again, we might at least salt the relevant page names. De728631 (talk) 15:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I've filed the SPI case and it can be found here. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Great, thank you. De728631 (talk) 16:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot

for your warnings and reverts here. Vcohen (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome. Just to be on the safe side we should try and find a reference that shows how there are type R160 cars being used on line F. De728631 (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

We are on the safe side, they are. Vcohen (talk) 22:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Good, thank you. De728631 (talk) 22:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Frisia (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frisia (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Frisia (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Martinvl (talk) 06:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Star

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For a helpful bit of talk page stalking. Keep up the friendly work mate, Arbitrarily0  17:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

WhiteWriter 14:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, ok... :) --WhiteWriter 14:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Korean People's Navy

The North Korean Navy does not operate any AWACS Il-76's or Mi-14's. The NORMAL Il-76's are operated by Air Koryo and the Mi-14's by the North Korean Air Force.

I have no idea why it is on the North Korean Navy page...Get it removed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.85.74.168 (talk) 12:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Block evasion

The single contribution of User:Jaggipatel123 appears to be a clear evasion by User:Jaggipatel123 of a block that you recently instated. The former did this while the latter did this (among other things). - Sitush (talk) 13:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and the edits are to Indian caste articles that are subject to sanctions. - Sitush (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the necessary. - Sitush (talk) 15:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me. De728631 (talk) 15:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

M60 in black ops listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect M60 in black ops. Since you had some involvement with the M60 in black ops redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: Destined Hearts page move

Hi! Thanks for quickly taking action on our request to restore the page moves done by User:Ifightback to its original Filipino title. However, the original title for Destined Hearts is Dahil May Isang Ikaw, not Because There Is Only You. Ifightback moved this page as Because There Is Only You then after a few hours, moved it again as Destined Hearts. -WayKurat (talk) 13:46, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've now moved it to Dahil May Isang Ikaw. De728631 (talk) 13:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:The Sarasota News Leader 83d40m front page August 17 2012 image

I have deleted this file since it was an obvious violation of copyright. The content of that website is copyrighted and they have a disclaimer that fair use of logos and banners is excluded with prior permission. You should know by now that we cannot simply take screenshots of other websites and publish them under a free license. De728631 (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Mea culpa -- hastily, I looked at the New York Times article and saw that an image of its front page was posted there. I failed to look carefully enough to realize that it was from the early 1900s and therefore, copyright free! I presumed that it was a fair use and proceeded to create the image. I'm usually much more careful. Thanks for your prompt action._ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 19:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, will await further information from you and can post the image again if it is allowed. _ _ _ _83d40m (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Please look at my talk page. There is a note from an anon regarding the image advising action that I am reluctant to follow without your advice._ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Would you advise letting the article be deleted and waiting for some time to pass? The publication has been getting a wide distribution for several months and I do believe it is notable. It is a very well written publication that quickly is being subscribed to by members of the community. The talk page notes a number of subscribers, I'd have to look, but that is only a portion of the viewers who go to the site. I used the word "spoof" because of the humorous copy sent to the other publication to which several of the staff members came from. One copy sent as a joke seems more of a spoof to me than a hoax. I do believe that the publication deserves an article, but do not want to make a controversy over it. I'd like your opinion before I act (or decline to act) on the proposed deletion. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 20:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, I did post to the discussion about deletion. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:DENY

Please see Sean comment and self revert.Thank you.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done by Activism1234. De728631 (talk) 19:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you sorry for misunderstanding.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I should say the same to you. De728631 (talk) 19:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey De, sorry if my tone sounded a bit harsh in that edit summary. Intention with the edit summary wasn't just about WP:DENY, but also to resinert reliably referenced material that got removed, I presume unintentionally. Just wanted to clarify that. Thanks. --Activism1234 01:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Indef at ANI

After getting nvolved and then blocking as you said per this, it may be best to unblock him and let another admin do so over he course of the discussion. It would look better on your part too.Lihaas (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

that would be unnecessarily bureaucratic. If another admin wants to overturn the block, they can with the current unblock request. Personally I wouldn't recommend it (De72863 also see this thread User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Incivility). IRWolfie- (talk) 12:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see a need for that. An unblock request by Meowy has already been denied by another editor who justified my initial blocking per WP:IAR. De728631 (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

EdelweissD

Seeing as you are an administrator, are you involved in this situation at all? If not, could you try to resolve it? At this point, I think a block is reasonable. AutomaticStrikeout 21:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not involved there, only left an administrative comment at the ANI discussion. But I'm still looking into this. De728631 (talk) 21:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Miliband move

Hey, could you do me a small favor and make sure I did the move back properly? It looks okay to me, but I have little experience in this area. I was about to ask someone to do that at ANI but you closed the topic swiftly (cute handle you gave me). Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not very experienced there either but I think it looks good. The logs and revision history are ok. And in case anyone objects, I don't see a point in nuking the edit summary with that deleted hoax name in it. The target page has a deletion log and the name's also recorded in the ANI thread, so let's leave it as is. But feel free to re-open the discussion if you like. De728631 (talk) 21:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather not reopen. Maybe I'll ask someone else just so I don't worry. Any admin you know with good move experience?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. I looked at WP:MOVE, and it looks okay to me.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright. De728631 (talk) 22:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Kudos

3β23 stunned me for a few seconds. Good work Tiderolls 22:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. De728631 (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Ramil Safarov

Hey there! I wonder why you put a full protection on the article. It is a current even now and is included on the main page. I think partial protection would go.--Yerevanci (talk) 18:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's a news article. What did you expect? Also, new official statements are released every few hours and I don't think that full protection will do anything good keeping the article up to date. --Yerevanci (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Whatever you say, sir. But what if I told you that most users don't bother to discuss the issues on the talk page?

Another great problem is racism. For example, User:Angel670's following comment "I see the page is being heavily edited by users of Armenian origin. I understand you hate Ramil Safarov...", should have been taken into notice and he must have been blocked, instead of fully protecting an important article. --Yerevanci (talk) 19:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you bother you read the rest of my comment? It says "I see that you're of Azerbaijani origin and I understand you love Safarov?? How does that feel?!?". It was a sarcastic reply to his racist comment. The question marks are there for a reason.

Anything else should discussed on the article's talk page where it belongs. You obviously didnt get my point. What I said was that most users do not want to discuss. How is time going to change that? For example, there are dozens of facts on the talk page proving that the motive of the murder was ethnic hatred, although some users (incl. User:Brandmeister) still remove it and call it neutralism. He have been around since 2005 and its obviously conscious move.--Yerevanci (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, thank you for your kind explanation! --Yerevanci (talk) 20:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Might it not perhaps be better to put semi-restriction on the article and impose a 1RR/week sanction on all editors who edit it? In its current state, the article is a mess. The grammar is terrible and the article is in dire need of some copyediting. For a topic that is now being fervidly discussed all over the news and internet, and even appears on the Misplaced Pages main page, I think that at least some edits should be made, at least under the supervision of some experienced third party editors. Just saying...--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 21:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

That idea has some merit. Since the topic is an ongoing event we should at least try to present a gramatically correct page to the general reader. I'll bring this up at WP:ANI. De728631 (talk) 21:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I support the idea! --Yerevanci (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Ethnic hatred

Hello. Thanks for the temporary protection of the article as it was edited in a non-neutral way by several users. Regarding your comment about ethnic hatred, I just wanted to point out that the issue was raised at the talkpage, where it was explained that the claim is not directly supported by source as required by relevant policy. I also pointed out that according to the source in question, Safarov rejected his evidence given in that source, so it cannot be used as a reference. Yet some users proceeded with reverts without satisfactory rationale at talkpage, trying to overcome the concerns. Brandmeister 18:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you explained your point of view but WP:Consensus is something different. There were still objections being made on the talk page and as long as that is the case, nobody should claim that either fact is true and feel entitled to edit the article. Please continue your dispute on the article talk page, where it belongs. De728631 (talk) 21:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Confusing edit summary.

This had me thinking for a minute GimliDotNet 17:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was a bit surprised too, but per Encyclopedia of Arda Gimli is the name of a hall in Asgard, not one of the dwarves in the Edda . And reliability aside, at de.wiki there's a list of all the dwarves from the Seeress' Prophecy that doesn't mention any Gimli in the original context: de:Dvergatal. So I decided to mention the Prophecy as an example of old Norse literature since that book by Solopova only mentions the dwarvish names from The Hobbit and Gandalf, not Gimli. De728631 (talk) 20:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Safarov article

Hello. I would like to add a photo to the Safarov article, from the demnostration in Cyprus about this matter. However, the article is closed. If I give you a link to the picture on wikimedia commons, can you add it please?Neo ^ (talk) 22:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, what's the link? De728631 (talk) 10:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Armenian-Cypriots_Hungarian_embassy.jpg (Armenian-Cypriots protest in front of the Hungarian Embassy in Nicosia over the extradition of Ramil Safarov to Azerbaijan)Neo ^ (talk) 11:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. De728631 (talk) 12:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. You may also link the word "Armenian-Cypriots" to the wiki page Armenians in Cyprus.Neo ^ (talk) 12:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Extradition and pardon of Ramil Safarov

Sorry, but how is removing a section that is not related to the subject matter of the article vandalism??? I made it clear in my edit summary that the sources that are used in this section do not mention Ramil Safarov, and in fact some of them are just bogus (they don't even support what the preceeding sentence is saying). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.149.121 (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The vandalism charge wasn't only directed at you but Safarov is in fact mentioned in the very first source you removed. Other than that, such large and contested removals of text should be discussed on the article's talk page. De728631 (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Then please look at the first sentence and the source. The first sentence says "Although Ramil Safarov is not a terrorist and only murdered Gurgen Margarian". Nothing, Zero about this in the source. The second part of the sentence is then sourced to a youtube, and down the quality of this section goes from there. But I guess that I did not discuss the removal of such a high quality section makes me a vandal in your eyes. Thanks, and enjoy editing wikipedia. I am done here after such a nice welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.149.121 (talk) 19:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

That kind of text is not vandalism per definition but it's a content related issues that you should have discussed before deleting it. Your removal was ill-advised and at the verge of vandalism, definitely edit warring. And as I said above, there are other cases. Over and out. De728631 (talk)

What kind of tone is that? Over and out indeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.149.121 (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Help request

Hello new admin. I congratulate you and wish you success. I hope you will rapidly become one of the "5 star" admins of WP known for their help to the other users. I am an old (by age, almost) but rather new (by experience, joined several months ago) user who has a lot of difficulty using the technical gadgets of WP like tags, templates etc. So help me you. Please. I have been involved in a heated discussion at the talk page of the article "Occupation of Smyrna". Indeed the "heat" is more on the edits and counter-edits of the article itself, rather than the discussion page, as you may see. (I am almost discussing by/with myself there. :-) One user complained of me to the Edit Warring Noticeboard but I understand the admins there are not convinced of me being a "warrior". (On the other hand, if the reverts on the said page are examined carefully I am afraid the user who accused me is in worse situation than this scribe, as regards especially those reverts which have not been duly argued upon. Anyhow, to cut a long story short, there is a dispute over there which I wish to take to dispute resolution or arbitration or to the good offices of the UN Sec. General. :-) The problem is, I looked at the relevant admin-forum pages and could not understand how to fill a request in none. I regret there was no computers when I was in my learning age, at least around my neigborhood. So I request you kindly to do me a simple (I believe, for an experienced user) favour: Please take the article to the relevant booard (Arbcom or Dispute Resoution or ...?) in my name. I mean, I know you would not do something in your own name if you are not convinced on it or have no interest in the topic, so please put this article in the relevant discussion board, noting there that it is upon my request and has nothing to do with you, other than helping me overcome difficulties stemming from inexperience. For "presentation or introduction" you can please just copy from the said discussion page my talk under the title "1920 coming before 1919". (I am afraid if we alter a basic concept like time/chronology some WP articles will be confusing for our readers.)

This is my first help request from a new admin. Thanks in advance and I reiterate my best wishes... --E4024 (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello E4024. First of all it would be very helpful to know which of the many sections on that article's talk page you are referring to. I can find your name in at least two longish discussions there and "1920 coming before 1919" is actually too short to be referred to dispute resolution, not to mention that a formal "dispute resolution" is very far up on the ladder of Misplaced Pages's process of conflict resolution and doesn't seem to be needed yet from what I could see from a quick at the talk page. What I recommend here is the following: in the talk page section that you would like to have moderated or where you need additional input from uninvolved editors, you can file a request for comments. Please put the following string in there, right below the section heading:

{{rfc|hist|pol}}

This will cause the article's name to appear on two lists, requests for comments (rfc) on historical topics and rfc on political topics. Experienced editors who work in those areas will then jump in and comment on the matter. This may take a while to proceed but in my opinion it is much less drama than filing for a dispute resolution. De728631 (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the information. At last some discussion seems to be beginning there recently. (Maybe they were waiting for me to be blocked. :-) --E4024 (talk) 00:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Heey, I just used that thing in another article's talk page. I hope I will not forget the appliance again. Thanks... --E4024 (talk) 11:02, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

108.78.177.132

I know you blocked this IP for 31 hours, but I feel that you should also probably revoke its talk page access, since now it's ust been ranting and using profanity now. ZappaOMati 00:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, User:Dennis Brown covered it. ZappaOMati 03:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Advice on Amon Amarth

Hi De, I'm thinking of applying for permanent semi protection on Amon Amarth, if you look at the edit-history it's one long (all be it slow) edit war regarding their musical genre. Do you think this would have any chance of succeeding? GimliDotNet 05:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Meh, I can see where you're coming from but I'm not very optimistic this would pass. The edit war is in fact that slow that I think it's easier to fix the occasional issues than to get a permanent semi-protection. :/ Maybe Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force could be bothered to lend a helping hand with reverting when it's needed. De728631 (talk) 16:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Archiving of Ramil Safarov talk page

Hi, I noticed that some of the topics on the talk page of this article had no replies for years: Notability and References. And some of them are no relevant any longer: Axe photo (an image of a typical axe is no longer needed as a link to the actual murder weapon is now provided), Possible fork (the forked article was already merged into this article due to another discussion), Extradition and pardon section (Extradition and pardon of Ramil Safarov article has now been removed). There were also some minor requests when the article was under the full protection. They were implemented without a discussion and are no longer relevant as this article is not fully protected any more: Edit request on 5 September 2012 and 2 edit requests.

So I suggest to move these topics to the archive. I never created archives myself, though I may give it a try. Or would you prefer to do it yourself? And should these topics be discussed before being archived or the reasons for their archiving are obvious enough? Thank you. --Daniel (talk) 05:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

An auto-archiver has just been added to this talk page. Are you already acting out on my request or is it just a coincedence that somebody added this auto-archiver 14 minutes after my previous message? --Daniel (talk) 05:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I happen to have this page in my watch-list and saw the request so jumped in a did it :) GimliDotNet 05:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I see. But I would rather still wait for the decision of De728631 regarding my suggestion above. He is overseeing this article, which has seen a lot of controversy before, and I don't want any of my actions to contribute to it. Thank you. --Daniel (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it, archiving is not a contentious issue - 90 days after the last person comments on a section it will be archived and readily available via the archive boxes. GimliDotNet 06:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but according to WP:ARCHIVE a consensus ought to be reached before setting up the automatic archival on the article's talk page. Thank you, GimliDotNet for your contribution and your desire to help, but I still would want to hear from De728631. --Daniel (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, auto-archiving of article talks should be approved by consensus. I've removed the archive template for the time being, but don't wait for me to jump in. Feel free to discuss this on the article's talk page and restore the bot template when you've reached consensus. De728631 (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit Warring at Croatian language

Within 10 minutes of you blocking User:AurgelmirCro at Croatian language, he showed up as an anonymous user and made this threat for continued edit warring and then reverted the article again here. Do I need to report him elsewhere or can you handle his block evasion without a further report? Thanks. --Taivo (talk) 09:44, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

And he has reverted one more time here. --Taivo (talk) 09:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and reported this sock of AurgelmirCro at the edit warring page, but should I also report him for Sock Puppetry? While it is clearly block evasion, I wouldn't think it's sock puppetry unless he dons the mantel of another registered user. --Taivo (talk) 10:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the protection. --Taivo (talk) 10:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me. De728631 (talk) 10:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

TfD closure

When you close TfDs, such as Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 September 9#Template:Infobox artifact please remember to update the template's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Good point, thanks for the reminder. De728631 (talk) 17:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter

Hey De728631. I'm dropping you a note because you've been using the Page Curation suite recently - this is just to let you know that we've deployed the final version :). There's some help documentation Misplaced Pages:Page Curation/Introductionhere that shows off all the features, just in case there are things you're not familiar with. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Album Awards

Your statement on the discussion for pages for deletion Jamey Harrow is very incorrect, engineers are always credited with album awards they are not credited with songwriting awards. Thank you and have a great day! --TheRealCrews (talk) 21:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Von Portugal translation

Hello. I was on Misplaced Pages:Translators available and notice that you were on the list for German to English translators and wondered if you could translate and add materials from de:Manuel von Portugal and de:Emilia von Oranien-Nassau to their English articles and create articles for their two children de:Manuel António von Portugal and de:Mauritia Eleonora von Portugal and their spouse de:Johanna von Hanau-Münzenberg and de:Georg Friedrich (Nassau-Siegen). If you can't I will understand. Thank you!--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 23:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

That's quite some work and I'm a bit busy at the moment. But I think I'll start with translating those articles step by step. It's going to take some time though. De728631 (talk) 12:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Indoor Cricket

Indoor Cricket

You deleted a picture of a set up of UK indoor cricket, specifically because you say there is a free version available, therefore wikipedia fair usage policy is no longer applicable. This is great news! Please upload this image today and let me know as soon as you have done so. Are you able to see the equipment quite well?

Thanks 16:28, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Its impossible to convey the nature of a sport as well in 10,000 words as it is in a single picture. Here are the facts: a) this picture is necessary b) there are no other pictures freely available c) you don't know nearly enough about cricket to be able to dispute either a) or b) Probably the best thing for you to do now is to undelete the picture asap and apologise. Thank you in advance for doing this Py0alb (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You claim a free picture already exists... what evidence do you have for this claim? Where is this mysterious picture that only you know about? Py0alb (talk) 13:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that's a different version of the sport and hence completely irrelevant. Please have another try at finding a suitable picture, and if not, upload the picture you erroneously deleted. Its ok to admit you made a mistake, we all make mistakes. Where the violation occurs is in ignoring wikipedia protocol.

I'm curious... Did you genuinely think I wasn't aware of that picture, given the extensive work I've done to improve that page? Its hard not to take offence at your maintain the assumption of good faith in this case.

Py0alb (talk) 15:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)