| Revision as of 10:40, 16 August 2011 view sourceDePiep (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users294,285 edits →Speedy gone wrong: mass deletions re Bogdan Nagachop and ISO 15924: note + struck← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:13, 16 August 2011 view source Ironholds (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers79,705 edits →Deletion review for Template:ISO 15924: repliedNext edit → | ||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
| ==Deletion review for ]== | ==Deletion review for ]== | ||
| An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> (Set of four). ] (]) 10:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC) | An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> (Set of four). ] (]) 10:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
| :Now replied. ] (]) 11:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:13, 16 August 2011
| No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
|
Paul Lendvai
I will probably restore the protection later today given the discussion at WP:ANI#Admin engaging in edit war, violates three revert rule, then locks page. Dougweller (talk) 05:13, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Actually I've started a thread at ANI about this, given that discussion. Dougweller (talk) 08:41, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- And if my actions get support, then with two such incidents getting support we can then do something about WP:INVOLVED citing those actions. I'm hoping you will support such a change. Dougweller (talk) 09:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sure; doesn't look like you need my assistance with this, but give me a poke when it moves to WP:INVOLVED and I'll chip in. Ironholds (talk) 11:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Lawyer up!
I made a suggestion at Talk:Main_Page#Errors_in_In_the_news regarding the Apple/Samsung legal dispute which has halted the sale and distribution of the Galaxy Tab into the EU. The front page calls it a patent dispute, whereas the injunction is over a community design. Is the current hook incorrect? - hahnchen 12:38, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
- Now replied; industrial design right != patent. Ironholds (talk) 13:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizes
Please be advised of Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Replied. Ironholds (talk) 01:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm following it. Ironholds (talk) 03:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Pascal (talk) 20:34, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yup; I've got rather delayed by RL shit, but I should have everything to you by Saturday at the latest. Sorry! Ironholds (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Groovy. Hope It didn't seem like I was pestering you. Pascal (talk) 22:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Naw, it's cool; I just got diagnosed with yet another (*sigh*) annoying digestive disease, and dealing with it is taking up my time. Ironholds (talk) 22:06, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Damn that sucks. I hope you get better soon, I really do. I'm basking the glory of my summer break from uni, and becoming addicted to wikipedia is not how I was planning to spend it... Pascal (talk) 22:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hah! I know the feeling :). Ironholds (talk) 22:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Okay; should now be in your inbox! Ironholds (talk) 16:48, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Re:The Good-Morrow
There are still three points (the first and the last two) to which you have not reponded- any chance I can hear your thoughts on those issues? Those three were really the big ones. J Milburn (talk) 16:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Speedy gone wrong: mass deletions re Bogdan Nagachop and ISO 15924
You deleted {{ISO 15924/alias}} {{ISO 15924}} {{ISO 15924/name}} {{ISO 15924/numeric}}, for db-g5 (Bogdan Nagachop). But currently they are ingrained into a set of transcluded (sub-) templates, which functioned well. I request you undo the reverts. Then, I am quite astonished that these templates are deleted without proper usage check. -DePiep (talk) 09:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- In a word, "no". Useful or not useful, these are templates created by a banned user in violation of his editing restrictions - they were deleted for a reason. Ironholds (talk) 09:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)This shows where it went wrong: Khojki (infobox), Category:User Cyrl.
- Invited User_talk:Gfoley4 to this discussion, they were doing the speedies too. -DePiep (talk) 09:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
At least you could temp restore them, so I can copy good code.-DePiep (talk) 09:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)This shows where it went wrong: Khojki (infobox), Category:User Cyrl.
{Intruding into the conversation, without taking sides) WP:CSD#G5 says "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others." (emphasis added). A quick look at some of the templates shows edits by others, but were they "substantial"? Discuss... Bencherlite 10:00, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- Saw that too (but could not check the history, as you could). The deleter did not, and not again now. I am writing a DRV now. -DePiep (talk) 10:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sure; please notify me when you've finished it. Ironholds (talk) 10:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- Struck temporal stuff. Another wikisession well spend. -DePiep (talk) 10:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Template:ISO 15924
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:ISO 15924. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. (Set of four). DePiep (talk) 10:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- Now replied. Ironholds (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)