Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:38, 8 December 2009

File:NassauFlamingo.jpg missing description details

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

Wal-Mart (disambiguation) at DR

Just letting you know that the discussion for Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (3rd nomination) has been listed for deletion review at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2009 July 15. You may be interested in commenting. Tatterfly (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

DLI

The templates have NOT been 'MARGED'. Look at Transport in India, Vehicle Registration plates of India, Road Signs in India. THEY ALL USE ASIA TOPIC|Topic Name here format. This is for other part of Asia as well. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

ALso, the article relates to India, so I'll ask for the opinions of others before further edits.. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I found several navboxes each listing articles for driving licenses in each continent. But most of them are red links, and there are only a handful of such articles that do exist. Therefore, I think it is better to list all these articles on the {{traffic law}} navbox, where there is plenty of room for them, and for plenty more, should these articles be created any time soon. Sebwite (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Your thoughts don't matter here.

It is an Asian country, and in such topics, the Asia topic template is used. I have asked on the talk page of the tpl. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: changes at Boston Road Transportation

Regarding your changes to {{Boston Road Transportation}}, the lists were developed through a talk process and are stable as is. The intent was to keep the list short and limit articles mostly to those that are well presented. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sswonk (talk) 00:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with leaving out those other city streets for various reasons. Navboxes are valuable and if possible, should be placed in every article. They are important in keeping pages de-orphaned and making their existence known to others so they can be improved. Sebwite (talk) 00:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The topic you changed is major streets. You added streets we do not consider major. This was done with input from the state project. It is one of the better road templates available. None of the pages are orphaned, and they are all linked via the category that is listed in the "See also:" section of the template: Category:Streets in Boston, Massachusetts. We developed the template as is it is specifically to avoid listing the streets you attempted to add. Sswonk (talk) 00:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Generally, a street that is notable enough to have an article is "major." A lot of the streets that I have added this template to previously had orphan tags, which were removed once it was added. Sebwite (talk) 00:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

You can nominate them for deletion if you like, they were mostly started four years ago without sources by an editor who has since retired and many are full of redlinks. The fact that a street has an article does not make it major any more than a college president having an article makes him or her a major figure in education. The list was developed, intentionally and with discussion, by members of WP:MASH and the standards we set are clear. Sswonk (talk) 01:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Pictures of Buses

LOL. Yeah it is kind of hard to take the pictures. Sure, I'll add some of my photos on here.--Lamborghini man (talk) 01:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Maryland Route 2

Hi. You raised the question of whether to take the Baltimore City sectino of route 2 a couple of eyars ago, and there is a response to your query on the talk page. I was the Good Article reviewer for the piece and I agree with that response. That is why I am reinstating the text. regards. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I am in the process of reorganizing a series of articles at the present time. This is something I plan to look into. Sebwite (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

OK. The cross-ref on MD 2 is good; when you have a proposal for restructure, raise it on the talk page - you might also alert User:Dough4872 directly. regards. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox busline

Hi! I'm Nima Farid. Can you remember me? I've finally found the solution for the problem with the infobox. (The {{{lenght}}} problem) I've started fixing it from 14th of August and I'll tell you when it's finished. Let me know that you've read this message by Clicking here

Template:Infobox busline

You can use this code:(eg:south_end =)

|
{{ #if:{{{south_end|}}} |
{{!}}-
{{!}} South End
{{!}}{{{south_end}}} }}
{{!}}-
|

--Nima Farid (talk) 11:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox busline

This template is done. But I added Friday frequency because in Middle East Friday is the weekend and a general template is better. And I added region because in Tehran buses are known by their region and in Esfahan and Mashhad region is used but if you omit them from your article or don't write anything in front of it, it won't apear in your article. --Nima Farid (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Wrong number

I have nominated Wrong number, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wrong number. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.  – iridescent 10:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for creating WP:SAVE. I wish I had seen this when I first started. We can probably add details regarding findsources and rescue. Joe407 (talk) 06:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I have not finished it yet. I have been working on a large number of essays and instructional pages, but I am in no hurry to complete them as I think about what they can include. Sebwite (talk) 21:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Bus Maps.

To be honest, I'm not really sure what the maps should be under. I thought since I put the picture together (from the PDF, then saving it as an image), it would be okay to put them under that license. Now I'm not sure. Any suggestions?--Lamborghini man (talk) 04:11, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know myself. I have had the same issue before. One time, I tried putting the cover of a bus schedule in an article, and it got deleted for copyright reasons. I do not even know who to ask. Sebwite (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

D.C. Meetup, Saturday, September 26

The 8th DC Meetup dinner will be held this Saturday, September 26, starting at 6 p.m. The event will be at Burma Restaurant (740 6th St, NW near the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro station). For details or to RSVP if you haven't already, see Misplaced Pages:Meetup/DC 8. (You have received this announcement because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.) --EdwardsBot (talk) 07:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision of {{Infobox busline}}

Hi, I'm the so-called WP:route diagram template (WP:ROUTE) activist and recently I found that some user wanna transclude the route diagram template into the {{infobox busline}} but the infobox template turns out to be not suitable for that. So I started to adapt the syntax from {{Infobox Public transit}} using the generalized {{infobox}} template, the result can be seen at {{Infobox busline/sandbox}}. You can tell that I keep most (if not all) of the original parameters intact, that means if you agree to replace the current template with the sandbox one, basically no article which transcluded infobox busline will need revision. Except for those who have transcluded the ROUTE diagram template so will look better after some modification. Please take a look and comment. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:How to save an article proposed for deletion

I just stumbled upon Misplaced Pages:How to save an article proposed for deletion, I forget how, anyway good stuff. Anyway I did some tweaking and rewording. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 23:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:Mock Afd Series

Is this page still needed? You seem to be the only contributor, and it's been untouched for 4 months. Please clarify your intentions at the talk page. TheFeds 19:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:No-edit orders

Is there a plan to develop this into policy at some point? Is it worth keeping? TheFeds 19:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Auto parts

Template:Auto parts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:Contributions of newbies are valuable

Misplaced Pages:Contributions of newbies are valuable, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Contributions of newbies are valuable and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages:Contributions of newbies are valuable during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Question

I tried to clarify it a bit more without changing the entire question. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Your RFA

Friendly advice: I think it's time to withdraw it. I'll support you again if you ever decide to give it another try, I think you have enough WP:CLUE where it matters, but your incorrect answers about the role of a closing admin have sunk this RfA. Gigs (talk) 18:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I feel that it is not over until it is over. This is only the beginning. I have seen a lot of AfDs in which after a day or two, about 2/3 of people state that the article should be deleted with good cause. But by the end, there are a lot of reversals and the article is ultimately kept. Consensus can change, even within days or hours. At the beginning of this discussion, about 80% of people favored me. That has dropped significantly now, but I am not losing hope. Sebwite (talk) 18:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I admire your optimism, but you'd need to get 100 more supports with no further opposes at this point. And it would still only have 78%. Gigs (talk) 19:22, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I would strongly advise your taking Gigs's suggestion. Your answer to q15 is objectively wrong -- it's quite common for AFD discussions to be relisted after the first week -- and your clearly expressed preference for such AFDs to be decided by the opinion of the closing admin rather than further review by the community is likely only to reinforce the opposition to your nomination. There's no point to putting yourself through this; there's likely to be no benefit to the community, since the issue is pretty fully explored already; and the loss of roughly half your initial support !votes, while no oppose or neutral !votes have changed to support, is frankly a rebuke you should consider carefully. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I second their opinions because it is unlikely you will be able to safe yourself now. Any additional votes will added more harm than good. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:09, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I'm just some guy you've never met with a few words of somebody else's advice. Anyway, in the words of some guy, "after a certain point, it's just masochism" (about RfA-ing). I know what you mean about wanting to keep it open as long as possible, I was going to (who would want to miss out on all the wonderful constructive critiscisms?!), but the amount of opposes that can start rolling in can get pretty brutal. And in a future RfA, some guy might think "hey, look, he got "X" amount of opposes, he must have been a horrible candidate, let's all oppose". In fact, they probably won't do that, it wouldn't be a very valid !vote, Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 19:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Just dropping you a note to let you know that I've closed your RfA as unsuccessful. I think your openness to hearing all the feedback that the community had to offer is a good trait for administrators, potential or otherwise, and I hope that the failed RfA doesn't discourage you. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback re: Q11

Admin activity

My vote at your RFA might have been misunderstood, and I'm writing this to apologize and clear the ground. That vote did not mean to diminish your abilities or achievements - I really do value them and am grateful to all you've done and doing for WP. I am known to be harsh to myself and others, and that vote clumsily reflects that. (Ironically, most of my "friendships" at WP started with a brawl :). Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 23:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, I am not trying to pressure anyone to change their vote. I only want to learn something. Sebwite (talk) 00:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Off course. I very rarely (if at all) change my votes and I value more the personal working relations than the voting itself. (for example, I often have more respect to those whom I disagree with :-) and consider it healthy). Materialscientist (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Your recent RfA

I just wanted to let you know that although I opposed your RfA at this time, this does not mean that I think you should forget about it forever!

Although I was concerned over your answers to two of the questions (as I said in my oppose) please take this as a learning experience. I see no reason why you should not become an admin the the future - I just believe that at the moment you are not quite ready for it!

Keep up the excellent work on Misplaced Pages. Hopefully you will consider re-applying for adminship in the future. During the time until you do, read up on the policies about deletion and about alternate accounts!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 16:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I do indeed plan to try again in the near future. I am not jumping into immediately; first comes the post-mortem. In any case, I never expected to get it on my first try. Had I gotten it, I would have been really shocked. Sebwite (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

"What Phantomsteve said." I did not exactly enjoy opposing your RfA, and I'm pleased to know that you expect to return to RfA in the future. --Orlady (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox busline (East End)

There seems to be a problem with East End. No matter what you type, it'll always says East End. I don't get it. Here is one of them. No matter what you type in, it will always say East End. I don't get whats wrong. MTA Maryland Route 23 is just one of them.--ETLamborghini (talk) 14:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I've been having the same problem with it. I know how to create and edit many different kinds of templates, but I have always struggled with infoboxes. Before this one was built, I asked lots of people to build one like this before User:Nima Farid finally did. This one still has its kinks that have to be worked out, and several people have tried. In the mean time, the proper entries should be included, and hopefully when this is resolved, they will automatically show up. One possibility is for an infobox expert to rewrite it completely. Sebwite (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixed replaced parameter name with correct case. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody 15:29, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:An article about yourself is nothing to be proud of

Misplaced Pages:An article about yourself is nothing to be proud of, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:An article about yourself is nothing to be proud of and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages:An article about yourself is nothing to be proud of during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Cyclopia 23:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sebwite. Thanks for starting this great essay. I think it has potential for great good, even the improvement of existing policies. I notice that you might have made a significant typo by leaving out the word "not" in your first comment. I'll add "doesn't" here and let you fix it there: "2.) This does doesn't contradict widespread consensus." Keep up the good work. I have just added a new section on the talk page. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:04, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for noting this after I overlooked it.

At this point, I think the nom would make a wise choice by withdrawing the nomination. It doesn't appear that s/he has any support for deletion, and s/he probably get little if any in the coming week. Sebwite (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

That's what has happened. Congratulations! -- Brangifer (talk) 01:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

BTW, you should fix that omission I mentioned above before it gets closed and archived. -- Brangifer (talk) 01:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge is no longer

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Asa_Seeley

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Defying_an_AFD_decision

AFD was merge but the all the merged information was deleted so this is essentially a way around to delete. If you feel "keep" is the 2nd choice, then consider re-creating the article. I might add that unsuccessful, not carried out, assassination plots of presidential candidates has been the subject of AFD keeps (articles about a questionable plot against then-Senator Obama). I have no opinion either way except that there should be an open process in decision making. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)