Misplaced Pages

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Archives

• Nov 2007 – June 2008  • June 2008 – Sept 2008  • Sept 2008 – April 2009  • April 2009 – June 2009  • June 2009 – Aug 2009  • Aug 2009 – Oct 2009  • Nov 2009 – present

WP:NODRAMA/2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Misplaced Pages:The Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks - I probably would have forgotten. JamieS93 02:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Important notice about VOTE 3 in the CDA poll

You are receiving this message as you have voted in VOTE 3 at the Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll.

It has been pointed out that VOTE 3 was confusing, and that voters have been assuming that the question was about creating an actual two-phase CDA process. The question is merely about having a two-phase poll on CDA at the eventual RfC, where the community will have their vote (eg a "yes/no for CDA” poll, followed a choice of proposal types perhaps).

As I wrote the question, I'll take responsibility for the confusion. It does make sense if read through to the end, but it certainly wasn't as clear as it should have been, or needed to be!

Please amend your vote if appropriate - it seems that many (if not most) people interpreted the question in the way that was not intended.

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 16:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion or not?

Hi there. In your summary for closing the Graphical interface of future operating system article, you've written that "The result was delete. Since it's so clearly WP:NOT, with zero chance, we should have been able to speedy that". Incidentally, we were able to speedy that article, and I had already, on the same day the article was created on 16 January 2010, placed a CSD tag on that page. An admin declined the speedy deletion, and suggested I take it to Afd, which I did. My question is this: who is right in this issue, the admin who declined the speedy deletion, or you, the admin who confirmed that this article should have been speedily deleted? Amsaim (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

• Hmm. Interesting that you brought that up. :-) I can't say it's a matter of "right or wrong" so much as application of discretion. Fabrictramp probably did fine, if you want to strictly follow the CSD criteria. However, IMO our CSD system has become overly bureaucratic at times. And when deciding whether or not to on-sight delete something, we shouldn't be worrying about petty stuff like "G2 vs G3, but not quite A3", but instead looking at the bigger picture. I often write custon deletion summaries, because it can give a better explanation than one of the templated reasons.
• I think A7 could be overused in deletions, but on the other hand, I've seen articles like "my top 10 favorite list of bands" or "something my friend made up yesterday" that were PRODded instead of speedy deleted, which I disagree with. We should be able to speedy things like that. In the closure statement, I was speaking in a semi-theoretical sense. Like I said, nothing wrong with Fabrictramp's decision, but it's my personal opinion that we should delete articles that are clearly not encyclopedic (WP:NOT, etc.) and would be snow cases at AFD (besides stuff like WP:CRYSTAL - that should not be within a single admin's scope, and requires a discussion). Otherwise, it wastes people's time to vote "delete" on irredeemable articles. Best, JamieS93 19:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Templates to delete

Hi. You deleted but then restored Template:Superleague Formula races. I would ask you to redelete it as the point was that it has merged with another template so the information is already there. It wasn't a mistake putting it up for deletion. There is another one, Template:Superleague Formula which follows the same story line by which the information has been moved in an appropriate way so as to leave the template defunct of any use. I would appreciate the deletion of both. Thanks. Officially Mr X (talk) 20:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

By "mistake" I meant that the deletion was my mistake. :-) I was attempting to delete several templates (all tagged for deletion by another user, for a different reason), and I accidentally deleted the SF races template, too, before even looking into the situation. Just a pure mistake on my part. I just deleted both for you under WP:CSD#G6 ("housekeeping, cleanup") since it doesn't look like "T2" was the CSD reason you were looking for. Best, JamieS93 22:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I probably shouldn't make requests here but nobody is sorting out any deletions at the moment and these three templates just need deleting as they are devoid of use: Template:China Superbike Championship Circuit, Template:GP3 Seasons, Template:Formula V6 Asia Series circuits. Thanks. Officially Mr X (talk) 12:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks like one of my colleagues just deleted them. :-) JamieS93 13:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

o: PeterSymonds (talk) 13:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Bulbasaur

You forgot to move the talk page. Thanks! _Blake 23:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, done. JamieS93 13:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Err. The talk page you deleted had a section on some sources found. Is there any way you can move that page to where Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur was so the section can be retrieved? Or is it hopeless now? _Blake 15:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to undelete those edits. Now that the edits are restored, there's a full record in the rev history (and the "possible refs" section has been restored to the bottom of the talk page). Looks like everything is in place, since you re-added the {{ArticleHistory}} template. Lemme know if you all need anything else. Cheers, JamieS93 16:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, if you will, can you delete the two revisions I made to Meowth on 1 September 2009 and then the (redirect) revision on WP:POKE/Meowth. After that it can be history merged.(silly conflicting histories...) Thanks for your help! _Blake 16:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Reverted the "redirect" edit and merged the page histories. I can't individually delete revisions without deleting the whole page and restoring specific edits, so I'm just leaving alone the two edits on 1 September. JamieS93 16:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I was under the impression it couldn't be history merged because those edits were conflicting. Thanks a bunch!_Blake 16:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem! JamieS93 16:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused by all of this activity. What part of WP:MAD prohibits having the history of the source article associated with a page in project space?

It was my understanding that the revisions from both pages were pertinent to the history/developement of the article. Thus it's best (or possibly required per GFDL, depending on the case) to merge the page history. JamieS93 16:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Nope. Bulbasaur was moved to project space, and the redirect to project space retargeted to the list. There was a little bit of edit warring, and Black Kite took care of the history at that time. The only thing this activity has done is make it easier for the group that refuses to respect consensus on the article to restore it to article space.—Kww(talk) 17:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Bulbasaur is currently a redirect to the list. If edit warring begins again, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. JamieS93 18:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

User rights

Hey JamieS93. Could you remove me from the autoreviewer and rollbacker groups, please? I don't create new articles and I don't vandalism patrolling. Thanks! :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 03:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Jamie doesn't need all those extra log actions. :) –Juliancolton |  03:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Tsk tsk Jamie. How could you! :-p Killiondude (talk) 05:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

K, fair enough. :-) And Julian, I need all the log actions I can get. JamieS93 18:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Please restore

You have deleted Talk:Dag Frøland (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs) giving the reason "‎ (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page)". I don't know why you conceded to this request without checking whether the user who requested the delete was the only contributor on the page. Please restore the page minus any possibly damaging contributions. __meco (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

The user who requested deletion (a bot) was indeed the only contributor to the page, and there would be no point in restoring it. I have created a new page instead. decltype (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

That is very strange. I'm (almost) sure there was a page with the banners earlier. Oh well :-) __meco (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Latest stable software release/mzirc

Please restore {{Latest stable software release/mzirc}} and its talk page. It did not meet the speedy deletion criteria and is still in use. Thanks. --Tothwolf (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Restored. :-) My fault for not checking to see that it was linked at Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients. JamieS93 00:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, thanks. I could not remove the speedy deletion template myself because I created the template itself, so a bot would have reverted me had I tried. --Tothwolf (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Switchfoot

It's good to see somebody watching these talk pages... sadly generally nobody responds even with prompting :) You can read my concerns at Talk:Switchfoot/GA1. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 20:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

If you make significant strides I'll keep it open as long as needed (well, not forever, but...) The one-week limit is just to push through the stuff that depends on someone actually showing up or not (I've been getting snippy responses to the effect of "fail it then, you bastard", so I can't wait 'till this is all done :P) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 21:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Jamie, let me know if you can't get it done and I'll help/do it. But not this weekend... Royalbroil 21:32, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

K, thanks! JamieS93 21:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

David Baynton-Power

Hello. I saw you edited David Baynton-Power. To satisfy my curiosity, did you you find it from User talk:WereSpielChequers or from somewhere else? --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I saw it from there. Which prompted me to visit CAT:BLP, so thereafter I noticed it was in the Dec 2006 category. JamieS93 22:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I have noticed that when I have something restored, somebody else often adds sources before I get to add mine. Perhaps I should ask to have them restored to my user space, to avoid duplicating effort. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't want to step on toes/edit conflict. The article just caught my attention as a musician (I work with music articles a lot), so I thought I'd hit up Allmusic and pop in a source. :-) JamieS93 23:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem in this case. I hadn't found the Allmusic source. I am happy to move on and leave this in your hands. I also found this source , but it is probably not reliable enough. --Apoc2400 (talk) 23:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protect

Thanks for the user-page armor. :) The vandal(s) in the last 24 hours created accounts, then went after my talk page, then haven't done anything since. I'm keeping lists of them, along with the original info, in case this flares up again. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. :-) I just indef'd the two as VOAs, btw. JamieS93 17:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For showing confidence in an editor and for digging deeper in an effort to resolve a problem, please allow me to grant you this token of my appreciation. McDoobAU93 (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Why, thank you...I didn't do anything special! ;-) I appreciate it, though. :) JamieS93 21:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

JamieS93

I am a resident in Assemblymember Espaillat's District. i am right now at his district office telling him of whats happening. I would like to update Assemblymember Adriano Espaillat's biography with truthful information. I respect the freedom of speech, but the information the person posted are 100% Inherently untruthful. Please check the Assemeblymember's website, http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/mem/?ad=072 He is one of the most respected legislators in the nation.

If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Denny Pichardo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denny Pichardo (talk • contribs) 20:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Adriano Espaillat

Dear JamieS93,

The article Adriano Espaillat has been VANDALIZED and PAGE BLANKED several times over the past 24 hours.

The version which you restored was PAGE BLANKED within a matter of minutes.

Some protection for this page may be appropriate.

Thank you,

69.203.119.66 (talk) 20:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Adriano Espaillat -- AGAIN

Dear JamieS93,

As you can see, the Adriano Espaillat article which you restored has just been PAGE BLANKED again.

I believe this article needs some page protection.

69.203.119.66 (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Not a problem. I took out the one remaining referenced statement as I thought it put a little too much undue weight on the subject compared to the length of the rest of the article. The section title was rather loaded, too. So now the article is totally unreferenced. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Excellent! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Janusboye

Thanks for fixing my bot's mistake here. I'll make sure that the bot doesn't mark user talk pages for CSD G7 in the future. Best, - Kingpin (talk) 20:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh good, thanks. Exactly what I was thinking. JamieS93 22:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Guillermo Linares

Can you take a look at this article, too? The same IP that did the hatchet job on the Adriano Espaillat article did the same to this one. I removed almost everything, but the article is kind of an stubby mess. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)