Misplaced Pages

User talk:RMHED/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:RMHED Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:41, 13 December 2007 editRMHED (talk | contribs)15,716 edits archived← Previous edit Revision as of 02:55, 13 December 2007 edit undoThe undertow (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,802 edits →Talk Page: new sectionNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{| width="100%" style="background-color:white;"
=== Death List ===
|class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid white; background-color:lightgrey; vertical-align:top"|

{| width="100%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background-color:Lavender"
I with you on the Death List / Pool issue. If you have any problems, give me a shout on my page. All the best in the just fight. ] 21:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
! <div style="margin: 0; background-color:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">Getting Started</div>
==Fair use rationale for ]==
|-

|style="color:#000"|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.
* ] • ]

* How to: ] • ]
Please go to ] and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
|-

! <div style="margin: 0; background:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">Getting Help</div>
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.
|-

| style="color:#000"|
This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 17:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
* ]

* ]
== dyk ==
* ]

|-
{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
! <div style="margin: 0; background:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">Policies and Guidelines</div>
|-
| style="color:#000"|
* ] • ]
* ] • ] • ]
* ] • ]
<hr />
* ] • ] • ]
* ] • ] • ]
* ] • ] • ]
* ] • ] • ]
|- |-
|]
|On June 26, ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on ].
|} |}
|class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid lightgrey; background-color:Seashell; vertical-align:top"|

{| width="100%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background-color:Seashell"
==]==
! <div style="margin: 0; background-color:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">The Community</div>
I agree that this looks like a hoax. I can't find any information on this guys or his crime on any of the major news site or elsewhere. I have removed the entry from ] and have contacted the author to request sources. Cheers ] 15:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

== Your article, '']'', was selected for ]! ==

{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|- |-
|style="color:#000"|
|]
* ] • ]
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on ].
* ] • ] • ]
|} <!-- ], ] -->
* ] • ]
Thanks for your contributions! (note that technically I should not have selected it, the article was created too far back in time, but I did and I don't undo mistakes unless they're really a big deal, selected is selected) ++]: ]/] 00:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
* ] • ]

* ] • ] • ]
== What do you want cited? ==

You have added the {{tl|fact}} tag to the death of Michael Anderson. What exactly is it you want cited? His death, or the films he directed, or the fact he got a Best Director nom in 1956? ] | ] 13:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
:A link to a news source reporting his death, as I can't find anything so far on Google.--] 14:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

==KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK ON FILLING THE PULITZER==
COMPLETE UP TO 1983! ] 19:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks, it can be labourious finding all the internal links, especially as newspapers have a habit of changing their names.--] 19:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

==Vandal==

Dude, stop vandalizing my articles. If you review the history pages you'll see your request for deletion battles have already been fought and won by me. This information has been shown to be relevant and frankly I was just cleaning up stuff and allocating it to a better place. It was in other articles before. ]

Dude, you're a punk for trying to get my stuff deleted the way you did. I'll give it three days...if you find any support I'll address your concerns. Though you never said anything on the Discussion page. ]

My articles weren't pointless and you did not give any justification for them, aside from you didnt like what they were about. I'm sick of people like you riding me for no reason. I am sure you do no care about public transportation but don't take it out on my articles. Why do you even care? The articles serve a purpose, maybe you just don't seem to care about it. Do you gain some joy out of ruining other people's work? And that's why you're a punk! You needlessly sabotage other people's work for no reason. And then you vandalize my user page instead instead of utting it in the talk page (where it's supposed to go. ]
:Posting my comment in your user page instead of the talk page,was an accident, sorry about that. I have nothing personal against you or public transport, it just seemed that those articles didn't really belong in Misplaced Pages so I put them up for AFD. I'm sorry you're harbouring such hostile feelings about it all. --] 02:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay man I can assume good faith on that. And maybe you have a point, but you didn't really justify why they should be deleted. These are articles which could serve to promote transit use, and also keep the available transit station articles short and sweet with relevant links for information. That is all I was trying to do. I will allow the Afd to remain up if there is support, I will concede that they should be deleted. Sorry if my reaction was a little over the top! --]

Please feel free to delete my comments here. And I hope it's water under the bridge. :) ] 02:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
:I concede that I could have given more detail for my AFD nomination reasons . As you say it's all water under the bridge now.--] 11:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

== Speedy deletion tags ==

Please don't subst speedy deletion tags. Please also remember to be ]. Describing pages as "total bollocks" is unnecessary, and may be a ]. ] (]) 22:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:Maybe it's time Misplaced Pages created a total bollocks CSD tag, as such a lot of new articles fall under its description. Attacking the article isn't the same as attacking the individual who created it. --] 22:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
::There are several tags that already exist, like {{tl|nonsense}}, {{tl|db-vand}}, and {{tlsp|prod|The page is ]}}. ] (]) 22:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

==DYK==
{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|- |-
! <div style="margin: 0; background-color:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">Things to do</div>
|]
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
|} <!-- ], ] -->

== Dorney Court ==

This article had been the subject of repeated vandalism. The article was unsourced and had evidently incorrect information in it. I requested information be supplied and ]d. The article had the information made even less likely. I reverted. The article was again subtly vandalised. I reverted. You the reverted my requests for sources and accused me of vandalism using the edit summary ''"rvv vandalism added link and reference"''.

The accusation that I vandalised this article is a ] and you should withdraw it immediately.

By all means recreate the article - with ] that can be ]. But think on before accusing people of vandalism, please, lest they think you a vandal. ]<b><font color="red">]</font></b> 22:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
:I wasn't accusing you of vandalism, it was vadalism from user 80.169.161.162 that hadn't been reverted,you must have missed that bit. I reverted that and added a reference and link. You deleted this article out of policy, it should be restored, you are an Admin it is your responsibility to follow Wiki policy--] 22:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

::As I say, feel free to recreate the article in question from anew, with ] that can be ]. The previous article did not do this and therefore was unsuitable for our ]. When an editor asked for these sources the result was a personal attack from you (cf ''"rvv vandalism added link and reference"''). Therefore I will not restore the article as it stood. Again, I invite you to recreate it with ] that can be ] this time, however, I will be willing to delete it again if you cannot provide ] that can be ]. ]<b><font color="red">]</font></b> 22:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
:::As I have already explained I wasn't referring to you, but to the vandalism by user 80.169.161.162. It is not up to you as an admin to arbitrarily delete an article that doesn't come under the CSD criteria. You have abused your position an are now attacking me by accusing me of calling you a vandal, please apologize for this. --] 22:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

::::''Right''. Now we are getting somewhere. For the first time, it now becomes clear that your personal attack against me wasn't intended as such - it just read as one. I now understand. It would have been useful if, rather than standing by the personal attack, you had simply withdrawn it. However, now is the time to move on.

::::So, we now need a useful replacement article with ] that can be ]. Articles on Misplaced Pages need to have ] that can be ]. The former article at ] didn't. This meant that, as you saw, when it was vandalised it was impossible to fix the vandalism. Any attempt led to the vandals - and you, accidentally looking like one of the vandals because the article didn't have ] that could be ] - simply making changes and falsely accusing the reverter of vandalism. This shows the value of sources.

::::The former article was severely compromised. It had been extensively vandalised, introducing wrong information that was impossible to refute. Therefore we need a fresh start. Start the article again, this time using the processes at ] inclusing <nowiki><ref></nowiki> templates (this may require a full reading of the page in question, rather than just glancing at it. Sorry). If every assertion is cross-referenced to a related printed or interweb document, it can be checked. The vandalism of the article by locals can then be held at bay and wrong accusations of vandalism will be kept to a minimum.

::::If you won't do this, please feel free to ask for a deletion review instead - the result will be more vandalism and an article that remains without sources, but you might find it less work. Thanks ]<b><font color="red">]</font></b> 23:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
ě
:So no apology from you Redvers for violating ] policy, I guess it doesn't apply to you. I did add a reference to the article and a link. There are many other articles about historic houses that also have no references, perhaps you might like to delete those too ] --] 23:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. Further to the above, I consider that it would be inappropriate to restore the article deleted by Redvers as it might provoke a battle with another admin. The best course of action would be to request a deletion review or to recreate the content. ] 23:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
:Yes I think I will request a deletion review, as if I recreated it the godlike Redvers would probably only delete it again.--] 23:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

:I have restored the article. The deletion was incorrect in just about every way imaginable.
* The building is notable, not, as Redvers claimed, non-notable.
* It was deleted in breach of WP rules on deletions.
* It was deleted on the basis that it had no sources. Sourcing is not a condition for deletion. Articles requiring sources simply have a template added in requesting that sources be provided.

It was a depressing abuse of procedure by Redvers. Admins aren't infallible. We all make mistakes now and then. Where the wrong procedures had been followed, the onus should have been on Redvers to make a case for deletion in afd, not on you to make a case to overrule a deletion, which is the presumption in reletion review. ]]\<sup><font color="blue">]</font></sup> 23:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
:Thank you ] for restoring the article, I was just about to go to deletion review when your message appeared. If Redvers had listed it for AfD, that would have been fair enough, but to just speedy delete it seemed bizarre. --] 23:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

*Dear RMHED, please accept my apologies for last night's unpleasentness, which was due to a very bad day on Misplaced Pages where I could do nothing but attract personal attacks, user page vandalism and foul emails. I allowed this to colour my view of the discussion we had and the article itself. I shall apply my own rule about disengaging when stressed more diligently in future. Thanks. ]<b><font color="red">]</font></b> 09:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
:Apology accepted, and no hard feelings, we all have our bad days. --] 13:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


==Jan Murray Article==
Thanks for the ] article. I looked for an article about him after reading of his death earlier this summer and found none at that time. Thanks for the research which went into writing the article.
] 22:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
==Fair use rationale for Image:Lherbier.jpg==

Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 01:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|- |-
|style="color:#000"|
|]
* ] • ]
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
* ] • ]
|} <!-- ], ] -->
* ] • ]
A nice article and tagline. Look forward to the ] DYK next! Thanks for the contribution! -- ] <small>]</small> 22:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
* Cleaning up: ] • ] • ]

== CSD A7 and Notability (]) ==

Hi. I went ahead and prodded the article rather than engage in a revert war, but I wanted to point out that the policy states that a speediable article has to make no assertion of notability. I use the guidelines established in ] to determine whether the article makes that assertion. Number of albums is a criterion mentioned, but only if they are "on a major label or one of the more important indie labels". For all I know, this band could have recorded and produced the albums in the garage; hence, the ''number'' of albums isn't what matters. It may be that I'm wrong and this band is notable, but it sure doesn't look like it right now. Cheers. -- ] 21:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
*:You could have just done a quick Google search, and you would have found out they are notable. Several of their albums are on well known labels. Why the rush to deletion?--] 21:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
::Because 90% of the newly created articles on bands have only a MySpace page to recommend them? I have no problem with researching an article before nominating for PROD or AFD, but for speedies they have to say ''something'' about why they're significant. This article did not. -- ] 21:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
*True, no specific claim of notability was given, but the fact that quite a few albums were listed over a significant period of time should maybe have given you pause to do a quick search, after all it only takes less than a minute.--] 22:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

== Media & PR ==

Dear RMHED

I assure you Misplaced Pages will not receive a response from my company Bassmint Music Inc. or Bassmintmusic.com claiming copyright infringment. What else needs to be done to claify and confirm who I am with Misplaced Pages? I am also performing artists Hashim Music and I just posted information about my musical career on here as well.

JC JR
Bassmint Music Inc.
mediapr@bassmintmusic.com

== We Posted the GNU License Info on the Bio (ref Jerry Calliste Jr.) ==

Release the hold on Jerry Calliste Jr. we do not have time to play games. It's a free service. Why not wait until you hear from the copyright owners before you say this is in "violation of copyright".
They will usually send a cease and desit letter out and in this case you will not receive one since it is our material we are posting.

We posted this GNU license info including your username to the Jerry Calliste Jr. biography for your satisfaction.

TO: RMHED

The Copyright (c) YEAR YOUR NAME.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2
or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation;
with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU
Free Documentation License".


Let's use some common sense here. Our Wiki user name is mediapr and our email address is mediapr@bassmintmusic.com. It's the media departments at most companies that usually work with this sort of information and repost it.

Thank you

mediapr@bassmintmusic.com

== Emails Sent Over An Hour Ago ==

RMHED

We have sent emails to permissions at wikipedia dot org from the various accounts and original source of the information. Please remove the hold you have on Hashim Music and Jerry Calliste Jr. so we may finish working.

Thank you.

Media Pr
mediapr at bassmintmusic dot com

== MINDING YOUR OWN BUSINESS ==

You should learn to mind 'your' own business and postings and not everyone else's. Get a life!!!

Media Pr
mediapr@bassmintmusic.com

== Cayo Hueso ==

As you tried to redirect Cayo Hueso, I'm letting you know that I have nominated Cayo Hueso for deletion as a POV fork. -- '''<font color="navy">]</font>''' 03:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

== Tony Reed ==

I am the artist that this article addresses. I don't care whether I have an article on this site or not, but apparently at least one fanatic does. I don't challenge deleting the article so much as I suggest blocking the account of the user. After actually reading the article, however, I propose that it be changed. There are some things that Qabbalah wrote about me that are not completely true and some notable things that were left out. Also, there's some personal information posted there that I prefer not to be accessable to the public. How did he get my wedding photo? I certainly agree that the pages dedicated to my albums ought to be removed or merged. The same with Cafe Graffiti which was not notable except, perhaps, as a side note. I will be happy to change it myself, but I don't know how so you'll have to bear with me as I learn.

PS, what does NN stand for? And why should I be a Pokemon character?
]
*NN just means non-notable ]. Now if you were a Pokemon character you'd be guaranteed of an entry, Misplaced Pages sadly, is awash with Pokemon articles. --] 19:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

== DYK ==

{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|- |-
! <div style="margin: 0; background-color:white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid lightgrey; text-align:left; color:grey; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.2em; padding-bottom: 0.2em;">Miscellaneous</div>
|]
|-
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
|style="color:#000"|
|} <!-- ], ] --> --] 02:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
* ] • ] • ]

* ] • ]
==Milly Vitale==
* ] • ] • ]
There's a good article on her in the Italian wiki I have in my sandbox on my userpage. Do you know of anyone who translates Italian articles to English? We should find someone. -] 00:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
<includeonly>]</includeonly>

|}
:UPDATE: I copied the Italian article to the discussion page of the English article and made a request to see if anyone will translate it. Hopefully someone will bite. -] 00:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
|}

<!--Template:Welcomeg-->
Hopefully someone who knows more about her will come along and flesh it out a bit.--] 15:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 09:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found ].

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 04:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found ].

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 23:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

==Fair use rationale for ]==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found ].

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale -->] 23:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

=="Goodbye Orlando" ?==
Hello RMHED. You've deleted Mr. McFarlane, first because the citation wasn't English (Deaths in 2007, 19:05, 21 July 2007), and then because he's not notable. If you've studied "Deaths" you'll find many of the deceased either don't have an English citation or a Misplaced Pages article. Mr. McFarlane did play in majors, so there is some notability. Some of the people listed in Deaths were college athletes, and the list also includes a horse (Jan. 29). Mr. McFarlane may be borderline for inclusion in Deaths, but so are a lot of other entries too. I am not sure why Mr. McFarlane deserves this speedy deletion and the rather disrespectful "Goodbye Orlando." What's that all about?] 20:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:Carry-On-Regardless.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to ] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 02:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:Carry-On-Constable.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to ] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 02:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:Carry-On-At-Your-Convenience.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to ] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 02:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:Carry On up the Khyber.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to ] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 02:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
==Fair use disputed for Image:Carry On Henry.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to ] and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 02:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

== Gerontology Research Group ==

Going to get involved in the equally contentious ]? ---- ] (]) 19:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:As (s)he's closed one, he probably shouldn't close the other one. I do applaud RMHED for doing that close though, as it was starting to go in circles. It sometimes does take an outside voice to say "guys, you aren't going to agree here". ] (]) 23:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
::That sounds like a good idea, I'll stay on the sidelines and watch with interest to see the outcome. ] (]) 00:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

== RE:AFD Comment ==

Haha yeah that was quite a nomination. And sadly I have gone through each article, in order to tag each one. The article you mentioned though, that is a stretch to say it is notable. There is a bus-stop in my home town that holds the distinction of being lowest in the city, but I doubt it will ever get an article. Just a thought, and I wonder what the record is for the most in one go?!?! cuz that took some time haha. Have a good day/night. Good luck editing.<br/>] <sup>''] ♦ ]''</sup> 00:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:Too be fair though, this station is claiming to be the lowest in the country, not just a city. Train station notabilty is a thorny subject, you realise that the chances of getting any of these deleted is very slim. Mass nominations like this rarely get deleted, especially so if they're the slightest bit contentious. ] (]) 01:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
::True, I dont know, its hard sometimes because I know that there is no encyclopedia that would include this info unless a major event happened there. These stations are not notable on their own, excluding maybe one or two. But we shall see, it should be an interesting debate. Hope you have a good day/night.<br/>] <sup>''] ♦ ]''</sup> 01:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:::I guess that's what makes Misplaced Pages so different, everything from pokemon characters to quantum physics. There's always something in it to annoy everybody. <br> And it's goodnight from me. ] (]) 01:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

Thank you for closing the AfD. I am sure that you have it in hand but just a reminder that you need to place the AfD result tag on the talk page. ] (]) 00:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks I always forget those things, is it compulsory though? I thought I read somewhere it was up to the closer. Probably good practice to do so anyway. ] (]) 01:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
::I am sure it is now considered compulsory; without it it would be very hard to spot on the talk page whether or not the article had been through an AfD. ] (]) 01:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks, I will definitely try to remember to do so from now on. ] (]) 01:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

== Closure of Andrew Glyn AfD ==

Thanks for closing ]. However, when you do this, can you please use {{tl|subst:afd top}} (or {{tl|subst:at}}) in place of {{tl|afd top}}, and similarly at the bottom, as described in ]? Among other things, that way the wubbot can recognize that it's been closed and automatically archive it from any deletion sorting pages it belongs to. Additionally, that way the "please do not modify it" line and a comment about how to open a new AfD are visible when anyone tries to edit the closed AfD. Thanks. —] (]) 16:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for telling me, will do so in the future. ] (]) 16:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

== Closure of Dorothy Walker Bush AfD ==
I am requesting that you undo your extremely premature closure of this AfD. If you do not, I'll have to put it up for deletion review since you closed it less than 24 hours after the discussion was begun. --] (]) 22:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:You'll need an Admin to open it up again, sorry if you think my closure was premature, but I just thought it highly unlikely that this will result in anything but a keep or possibly a no consensus. ] (]) 22:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
::Ok, DRV opened . ] (]) 22:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:::DRV speedy closed and AFD reopened by an administrator (myself). The point of running XfD for five days is to allow consensus to develop over time. It is never correct to close way early as no consensus. ] 22:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inappropriate closure of Ocean Finance AfD==
Your non admin, speedy close of ] was inappropriate. Closing discussions in which you have offered an opinion or for a page that you have edited heavily presents a conflict of interest. In addition, the close did not match all other viewpoints expressed in the AfD. The point of running XfD for five days is to allow consensus to develop over time, not to circumvent it through a speedy close. Please adhere to ]. -- ]]/] 16:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*:I disagree I think I acted perfectly correctly, and would do so again. ] (]) 21:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*::You did not act correctly. It is wrong to close a discussion you have been a significant participant in. This is a fairly basic rule of etiquette around here. ] 21:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*:::I disagree, aznd would act accordingly again. ] (]) 21:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
** Look non-admins are only supposed to close only non-conterversal AFDs, such as unaminous keeps and merges votes, etc, not no consensus and especialy ones that you particiapated in. Not even admins can do that, if you disrupt AFD one more time I will block you ] <sup>]</sup> 23:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
**:Clearly we have different definitions of disruption, how did my turning Ocean Finance into a redirect cause disruption? ] (]) 23:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
**::No answer, because no disruption was caused, by merging and redirecting all useful information was retained. ] (]) 00:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
* I took the answer of "would act accordingly again" as disruptive, my fault, as meaning that you would close AFDs like that even though you are warned from several different admins, don't do that again please. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inappropriate closure of Andrew Glyn AfD==
Your non admin, speedy close of ] was inappropriate. You closed the AfD asserting that Andrew Glynh has received significant coverage in ] that are ] of the subject, yet neither the article nor the AfD brought out significant coverage. The speedy close reasoning did not match all other viewpoints expressed in the AfD. The point of running XfD for five days is to allow consensus to develop over time, not to circumvent it through a speedy close. Please adhere to ]. -- ]]/] 17:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*<strike>Nope disagree with you again, if you think you're right then re-open the afd.</strike> ] (]) 21:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:Agreed I was hasty.] (]) 17:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inappropriate closure of Rockbitch AfD==
Your non admin, speedy close of ] was inappropriate. The nominator cannot withdraw the AfD once others have posted deletion opinions. Closing the AfD as withdrawn once others have posted deletion opinions circumvents the deleter's right to have their views weighed as part of a consensus determination. In particular, the speedy close reasoning did not match all other viewpoints expressed in the AfD. Please adhere to ]. -- ]]/] 17:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*<strike>Another disagree, I think my closure was perfectly reasonable and would act accordingly again.</strike> ] (]) 21:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:After giving this some thought, you are correct, I didn't follow policy. ] (]) 17:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
**You are wrong. ] specifies that a nomination can be speedy kept when {{cquote|No-one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted, and the nominator either withdraws the nomination, or wishes the page to be moved, merged, or have something else done to it other than deletion.}}
:If there are other delete opinions in the discussion, it is clearly and obviously wrong to speedy close it as keep because the nom was withdrawn. Do not do this again in similar cases. ] 21:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*::<strike>It wasn't a speedy keep, it was a keep.</strike> ] (]) 21:38, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*:::It was speedy, it was less than five days after the discussion began. You many not have used the word "speedy", but that doesn't affect the fact that it was speedy. ] 21:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
*::::<strike>If that criteria were followed to the letter afd's would be backed up for days. Plenty of other people have closed afd's early with a Keep decision. I stand by my closure.</strike> ] (]) 21:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
* Your close of ] also was inappropriate because the nominator cannot withdraw the AfD once others have posted deletion opinions. -- ]]/] 17:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
**<strike>Yes I should have called it a '''Keep/Nom Withdrawn''', but apart from that small error still a perfectly good close.</strike>
:Yes I was premature in that closure, I apologise for it. ] (]) 17:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
** That's the only close I fairly agree with ] <sup>]</sup> 23:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inappropriate closure of Stephen Coles AfD==
Your non admin close of ] was inappropriate. This clearly was a controversial and ambiguous AfD. Your closing statement "the keepers and deleters seem unable to come to an agreement" lacks logic and may have served to inflame the situation even more. The close reasoning did not match all other viewpoints expressed in the AfD. Please adhere to ]. -- ]]/] 17:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
* Another perfectly good closure, if you disagree re-open it. ] (]) 21:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
**I think the No consensus result I called was the correct one, but in hindsight I really should have left it to an Admin to do. ] (]) 17:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inappropriate closure of 300-page iPhone bill AfD==
Your non admin, speedy close of ] was inappropriate. This was a close call, controversial, and ambiguous AfD. The speedy close did not match all other viewpoints expressed in the AfD. Early closure as no-consensus is never appropriate, no matter by whom. The point of running XfD for five days is to allow consensus to develop over time, not to circumvent it through a speedy close. Please adhere to ]. -- ]]/] 17:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
* I probably should have left it a while before closing this one, please re-open it, I bet you it ends up as '''No Consensus''' though. ] (]) 21:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

== With all of these complaints ==

perhaps you should consider that you're closing inappropriately, and should take a break from that aspect of the project for awhile?]] 01:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe so, maybe not. Who can say? I'll drift where I may. ] (]) 02:09, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

==General comments on speedy AfD closes==
Hi RMHED. I see what you are saying about the likely outcome of AfDs you speedy closed. However, I'm not so concerned about your closing with the right or wrong outcome as I am about giving each of the AfD participants the chance to feel that they were being treated fairly. A very important aspect of consensus is that everyone participating in that consensus needs to feel that they are being treated fairly and equally, particularly when it is apparent that they are going to end up with the short end of the stick. People's perception and belief about being treated fairly in the consensus affects how they act towards others. A correct outcome does not help the losers accept the results. A fair process does. That is one reason to let an AfD run five days even though it initially has many keeps in the first day or two and seems unlikely to be closed as delete. -- ] 01:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
:As for the backlog, there always are plenty of AfDs that need closing at ]. -- ]]/] 01:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*:Thank you for your reply, You are of course right, perception is everything. I shall give myself a severe thrashing. ] (]) 02:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*::Sarcasm is always a great response when an admin tries to give some constructive criticism. ]] 02:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*:::I wasn't being sarcastic. Flippant possibly, sarcastic no, I'ts just the way I come across sometimes. ] (]) 02:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*::::Perhaps. But either way, it's completely unhelpful and counterproductive. ]] 02:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
**:Counterproductive to what? would you rather I be contrite and ever so humble? I'd rather just be me, than put on a false front. ] (]) 02:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
**::Counterproductive to the collegiality necessary to make a project the size of Misplaced Pages work. Your attitude towards those who have tried to approach you doesn't further the project at all. ]] 03:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

== ] applies everywhere ==

] applies to all pages everywhere. Accordingly, a portion of comment was inappropriate, and I've it. Not the worst thing I've ever seen, and clearly not meant to be true, but also clearly an attack. Comments that would be thought nothing of in the blogosphere may not be acceptable here. Please be more cautious about this in the future. ] 04:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
*:Duly noted. ] (]) 20:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

== Mass tagging of Heroes episodes ==

You are invited to take part in the discussion regarding your mass-tagging of Heroes episodes with {{tl|notability}} on ]. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 15:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

::I noticed that you mass tagged the heroes episodoes. I undid the tagging, because if you tag all the episode article, that would eliminate the point of having a Heroes Wikiproject. If you want to discuss the episodes notability, the proper place to do that is on the wikiprojects discussion page for heroes. It makes no sense to tag all those episodes when we have a project page and that is one of the main tag. You should really take more time and care when tagging articles. I see from you talk page that you have tagged several episode pages for several different television series. are you new to wikipedia? or are you just bored and feel the need to tag an article that is connected to a wikiproject? the wikiproject page for heroes has the purpose of setting task that need to be done. they can not be done over night. please take more care in your tagging in the future.--] (]) 21:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*:Please reference the Heroes episodes then to meet ], I bet you can't somehow. ] (]) 22:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

*'''Comment'''- keep up in this fashion, and you'll be headed the same way as Alkivar. Just stop it.] (]) 21:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
:If you mean I should stop tagging articles with ], then rest assured I've given up that futile exercise. There really is no point in fighting an unwinnable battle. WP:EPISODE is 'holed below the waterline', it may once have had consensus but I really doubt that it does now. ] (]) 23:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

== Mass tagging of Star Trek: The Animated Series episodes ==
On 23 November 2007 you mass-tagged every episode of ] with {{tl|notability}}: ]. This is the series the Los Angeles Times referred to as a "Mercedes in a soap box derby", due to the quality: . Because of the pervasive cultural impact of Star Trek, these articles are as notable as many other articles on individual Star Trek episodes. To achieve consistency and uniformity with your mass tagging, we'd need to tag/delete most other Star Trek episode articles. Obviously that won't be done, so I suggest you revert your mass-tagging of the animated series episodes. ] (]) 16:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*:I'm sure the series as a whole is notable just not individual episodes. If the other Star Trek episodes you mentioned don't meet ] I'll tag them as well (possibly, if I can be bothered). ] (]) 16:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
:::There are individual articles for virtually every Star Trek series episode: ], ], ], ], ]. In general, The Animated Series is no different from many of those. We must have consistency on this. If the others are not tagged, neither should be the Animated Series episodes. Your mass tagging should be removed, or else you should immediately tag all the other Star Trek episode articles that don't meet ]. If you're not prepared to do that, you should remove the Animated Series tags until you are prepared. ] (]) 18:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*Good grief! but if you insist, then so be it. ] (]) 18:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
**On second thoughts I haven't the stamina to tag all that lot, I really don't care enough about the issue to do so. My regards to you. ] (]) 19:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
::::If that's the case, could you please undo your mass tagging of all the ] articles? ] (]) 21:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*:They are correctly tagged as they lack the required references to meet ], but if you or anyone else wants to remove them so be it. I won't re-add them, no point in fighting a losing battle. It's clear nobody takes any notice of ], so why should I. ] (]) 21:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::I removed them per the above discussion. From a pure technical standpoint, I agree with you. A strict interpretation of might indicate these aren't notable. However -- the same is true for hundreds of other episode articles: ], ], etc. At some point we must bow to the overwhelming prevailing practice, regardless what ] says. There are thousands of episode articles. We must also use common sense. The presence of these articles doesn't hurt Misplaced Pages. Mass tagging them or deleting them doesn't improve things. It only engenders conflict and consumes a lot of time. It would be a Herculean effort to tag all these espisode articles, would burn thousands of hours in discussion/debate and would likely not result in deletion.

:::::By contrast, there are many articles (on various subjects) which could use qualitative improvement. Instead of mass-tagging articles with no prior discussion, using your time and knowledge to improve the quality of existing articles would be more beneficial. Add content, clarify wording, correct technical errors, etc. ] (]) 15:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

A thought. Before doing mass-nominations of similar articles to AFD, it is generally a good idea to do a test AFD of a few individual articles. I suspect the same approach would work well with tagging. Tag a few and put a note about it on a central place (list of ... or WikiProject ...) saying explicitly that they are being done as test cases. That gives a smaller set of articles with the tags on them, and more focused effort can be put into them. This strategy might work better in the future. ] 03:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
:I would never do a mass nomination of any articles as this is always counterproductive. I'll steer clear of tagging as well. I cannot see any chance of ] guidelines being enforced in regards to very popular TV shows, there just isn't the consensus. Maybe it's time notability standards were lowered in regards to TV episodes as this is the ''de facto'' situation at present. ] (]) 15:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

== No problem with policy ==

I have a problem with how you choose to force your own interpretation of policy with massive, uncollegial edits. Instead of trying to engage on an article, explaining the whys of what you wish to do, you simply do massive tagging (or controversial closing of AfDs). This is unhelpful in the extreme. I'm not the only one who holds this view. Your flip attitude towards those who dare challenge you on your application of your interpretation of policy is not helpful either. ]] 18:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*:Tagging articles is good policy, how is that uncollegial? I sugest you read ] you seem to be somewhat clueless. ] (]) 18:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*::I am quite familiar with the policies and procedures of the project regarding notability. I have informed you that I have no problem with your having an interpretation regarding these articles with regards to policy. I have a problem with your methods in attempting to force your interpretation onto the project ''en masse'', instead of engaging in productive discussions about the whys of your interpretation. Also, regarding your assertion that I "seem to be somewhat clueless", I would ask that you be ''much'' more civil in our future dealings with one another. Civility is a core policy at Misplaced Pages, as I'm sure you know, given your extensive policy knowledge. ]] 18:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
**I don't see how tagging an article is trying to force my interpretation on others, they either take note of it or not, I can't force anyone to do anything. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. ] (]) 19:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
:::It seems here that there is a dispute with how RMHED views policy that is not being resolved due to his unwillingness to change in the face of strong advice from more experienced editors and admins. I suggest that this conflict go to ]. I believe that only in this way will RMHED understand that his actions thus far are counterproductive to the project and his refusal to alter them is nearly a violation of ]. There is a big disconnect between using ] to take non-admin janitorial actions and taking such actions that result in the denial of participation in the Wiki processes to other editors. --] (]) 19:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*How is correctly tagging articles incorrect, please show me which policy I am violating? I have made no closes of AfD's since the above mentioned. I find that I am being harrassed for no good reason, please desist from doing so. ] (]) 19:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
*:''You'' call ''me'' "clueless", and then ask what policy you are violating? As for your assertion that you are being harrassed, that's simply not the case. You're simply having your interpretation of policy ''challenged'', nothing more. And when you go around placing notability tags on multiple episodes of a number of popular series, what did you expect would happen? ]] 04:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
*::I apologise for calling you clueless it was needlessly rude of me. You do of course make some valid points. ] (]) 15:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

==]==
Hi,

I noticed that you have supported this article's nom for delete. I have cleaned up the article now. Can you please have a look and review it to see if the article looks in a good shape to '''keep'''? Thanks -- ]<sup><small>]/]</small></sup> 06:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

==]==
I notice you performed a "non-admin' closure of the AFD for Uncyclopedia. Just wanted to say that in the unlikely event you encounter any challenge to this, I fully endorse and support your actions. Regards ] (]) 01:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC) (Administrator)
:Thanks, I thought it was such an obvious candidate for a SNOW closure. Hopefully most others will agree, though perhaps not the nominator. ] (]) 01:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

==You can stop==
. Persistant pushing of this issue and dragging it on to Jimbo Wales talk page doesn't make your arguement stronger and only makes you look like your trolling. Please stop this behavior. — ]_] 02:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
*How could expressing my opinion look like trolling? I'll take the argument wherever I choose. Or am I not allowed to argue my point? ] 02:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

::RMHED - I'm just swinging by to make a few comments. I respect that you have fairly strong views on this issue, and it is never fun to be accused of "trolling". So you have my sympathy there. Appealing to Jimbo is generally considered bad form - one because Jimbo is unlikely to ever read it and two because it gives the impression (whether you intended to or not) of being a bit "over-dramatic". If you want to delete your additions to Jimbo's page, by all means (although I won't permit anyone else to do it.)

::It's never fun to be on the wrong end of a consensus, but that's life at Misplaced Pages. We've all been through it. You're a good editor, so try to stay focused on that and keep up the good work. Regards ] 03:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the comments, I'm not really appealing to Jimbo as I know he doesn't really get involved in these things. Still it would be nice to get his opinion on these type of articles, as I can't see what they add to the encylopedia. A young woman did a bit of part time nude modelling is murdered, media turn it into a big story by focussing on the most sensationalist aspect. I guess sex and death sell papers. ] 03:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

== 3RR violation on ==

<div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for {{{{{subst|}}}#if:24 hours|a period of '''24 hours'''|a short time}} in accordance with ] for violating the ] {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|at ]}}. Please be more careful to ] or seek ] rather than engaging in an ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{sig|}}}|] (]) 20:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-3block --> Please try and gain a consensus on the talk page before taking any action. The removal of a section of text from the article was clearly opposed by other users as seen on the talk page. You are very welcome to make constructive edits after the block has expired but please remmeber that it is better to communicate your points on the talk page to try and convince other users rather than going against consensus. Thanks. ]<small>]</small> 18:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
{{unblock reviewed|1=I haven't violated the 3 revert rule I made 3 reverts the 4th edit was unconnected to the previous 3. It wasn't a revert but was removing the prominence given to Emily Sander's modeling name. This prominence was added by a new editor with no other edits but the Emily Sander article. This happened before the page was semi-protected. So at no time have I violated the 3 revert. OK having reviewed the 3 revert rule a case could be made that I violated it, such was not my intent. After what I thought were 3 reverts I took the matter to the talk page, I have no intention of reverting again as it would be futile.|decline= 00:22, 00:27, 00:30, 00:37. 4 reverts. Sorry but edit
warring is harmful to the encyclopedia (even below 3 reverts). Please come back once your block fades and continue improving it ;) -- ] <sup>]</sup> 20:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)}}

==Funny how some people can get a block overturned, but not others==

I guess it's who you know that counts on Misplaced Pages. ] 20:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages you have severely pissed me off with your petty block, it serves no useful purpopse other than to make me very disinclined to be cooperative in the future. ] 21:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
:Im sorry but you did violate ] and ] does show a lack of cooperation. Im sure that you can be cooperative and have potential to contribute constructively and well to this encyclopedia but even the most experienced of users can get blocked for violating ]. Thanks. ]<small>]</small> 21:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
::And what purpose does this block serve? As a punishment it's meaningless as a warning it's meaningless. I've already said my intent was not to violate the 3R rule, but it seems that is not good enough. If Misplaced Pages wants to make enemies it's going the right way about it. ] 21:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
<s>:::I've protected this page for 30 minutes as a result of your inexorable blankings and undoings thereof. Please stop; such behavior is not helping you. —] <small>(])</small> 21:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)</S>


== ] ==


*]
I've expanded (and hopefully balanced) the article quite a bit, would you reconsider your opinion? --] <sup>]</sup> 17:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
] Thanks!
By the way, about the sourceless images - I think you can cite Amazon.com for them. For example, ] looks a lot like the picture on http://www.amazon.co.uk/Carry-Regardless-Sid-James/dp/B00005MFJD (see larger image is a 500x500 image, but surely the DVD cover is rectangular, not square). Since they're fair use images anyway, it really shouldn't matter where we got them, since we're not claiming we have any permission, but sometimes these things get enforced by bots, or people acting like bots. --] <sup>]</sup> 20:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
*Thanks, I've done as you suggested, I hope it's acceptable. ] (]) 21:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


== ] ==
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carry-On-Regardless.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.


Per ], ambiguous closes should be left to an administrator. This was one of those cases; as such I have reversed your closing. '''] ]''' 01:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> —]] <sup>]</sup> 21:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
:In what way was it ambiguous? An Admin does not have any greater insight than other editors.] is a guideline and not an official policy and guidelines are malleable. My regards to you. ] 01:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
::It was ambiguous in that it wasn't clearly obvious to anyone. While an admin does not neccesarily have any greater insight, their insight has been deemed trustworthy through RfA. In ambiguous cases, the closer's opinion and ability needs to be vetted, an admins have that. Non admins don't always. Also, just because it's a guideline and policy does not mean it can just be disregarded; it still represents consensus. '''] ]''' 01:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Good answer, but remember that an admin is "vetted" primarily because of the powers of deletion and blocking they are entrusted with. Ambiguity by its very nature is ambiguous, where some might see ambiguity others might see a clear result. If you weren't a participant in the AfD how would you have closed it? ] 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
::::They've been vetted by passing an RfA. How I would have closed it is neither here nor there, but I probably would have relisted it to see what other people thought of the sources that were there. '''] ]''' 04:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
:*Thanks for your answer, nicely thought out. ] 13:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


==Deletion review on ]==
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carry-On-Constable.jpg==
An AfD in which you commented has been brought to Deletion Review, You may wish to comment there. ''']''' (]) 09:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
:Thanks for letting me know, <s>I doubt I'll make a comment though.</s> ] 13:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
::I couldn't resist. ] 21:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


== Re: ] ==
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> —]] <sup>]</sup> 21:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carry-On-At-Your-Convenience.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.


Done. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --] (] - ]) 04:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> —]] <sup>]</sup> 21:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


== Talk Page ==
Please note that source info has to include who the copyright holder is, not just the website the image was taken from! Thanks! —]] <sup>]</sup> 21:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


Is there a particular conversation you need from my talk page? I'm curious as to why you are so interested in the restoration. Were we in the middle of an important discussion? ] ] 02:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
: That's a new one. If the copyright holder is unknown, we can't use it through fair use? That seems silly. ] is regardless of the copyright holder, the entire point of fair use is that we're using it ''despite'' the copyright holder. But I added a boilerplate sentence as demanded, as that seems easier than debating the point now. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
::Fair use just seems to get more complicated by the day. ] 22:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:55, 13 December 2007

Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous


Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Postal Dude (Postal)

Per the deletion process, ambiguous closes should be left to an administrator. This was one of those cases; as such I have reversed your closing. I (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

In what way was it ambiguous? An Admin does not have any greater insight than other editors.WP:DPR#NAC is a guideline and not an official policy and guidelines are malleable. My regards to you. RMHED 01:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
It was ambiguous in that it wasn't clearly obvious to anyone. While an admin does not neccesarily have any greater insight, their insight has been deemed trustworthy through RfA. In ambiguous cases, the closer's opinion and ability needs to be vetted, an admins have that. Non admins don't always. Also, just because it's a guideline and policy does not mean it can just be disregarded; it still represents consensus. I (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Good answer, but remember that an admin is "vetted" primarily because of the powers of deletion and blocking they are entrusted with. Ambiguity by its very nature is ambiguous, where some might see ambiguity others might see a clear result. If you weren't a participant in the AfD how would you have closed it? RMHED 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
They've been vetted by passing an RfA. How I would have closed it is neither here nor there, but I probably would have relisted it to see what other people thought of the sources that were there. I (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review on Raccoon Police Department

An AfD in which you commented has been brought to Deletion Review, You may wish to comment there. DGG (talk) 09:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I doubt I'll make a comment though. RMHED 13:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't resist. RMHED 21:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gerald Gustafson

Done. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Tom (talk - email) 04:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk Page

Is there a particular conversation you need from my talk page? I'm curious as to why you are so interested in the restoration. Were we in the middle of an important discussion? the_undertow 02:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:RMHED/Archive 1: Difference between revisions Add topic