Misplaced Pages

User talk:BDD/Archive 18: 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:BDD Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:01, 13 May 2015 editAtsme (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers42,804 edits Please help with a move: TY← Previous edit Revision as of 18:02, 13 May 2015 edit undoBDD (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators111,920 edits Please help with a move: rNext edit →
Line 31: Line 31:
::::::::Hm. Well, I didn't want to just nuke Jytdog's comments from earlier today, and the talk page pre-move had already gotten well beyond the 75K standard for when it's time to archive a talk page. Talk pages are archived all the time; is this so bad? You could certainly start a new section drawing attention to the archive and your thoughts on the previous discussion. --] (]) 17:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC) ::::::::Hm. Well, I didn't want to just nuke Jytdog's comments from earlier today, and the talk page pre-move had already gotten well beyond the 75K standard for when it's time to archive a talk page. Talk pages are archived all the time; is this so bad? You could certainly start a new section drawing attention to the archive and your thoughts on the previous discussion. --] (]) 17:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
{{od}}Ok, good plan. I'll just link to it, but I wasn't sure how long the connection to the sandbox was allowed to remain. Thank you so much for your help. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><sup>]]</sup> {{od}}Ok, good plan. I'll just link to it, but I wasn't sure how long the connection to the sandbox was allowed to remain. Thank you so much for your help. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><sup>]]</sup>
:Oh, it started out in your sandbox, and the old title is now an {{t|R from move}}, so that's fine. Take it from me as a regular RfD admin—as long as you want the old names redirecting, they will. If you ever want them not to, they can easily be deleted. --] (]) 18:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:02, 13 May 2015


Archives

1. April 2005–July 2012
2. July 2012–October 2012
3. October 2012–November 2012
4. November 2012–January 2013
5. January 2013–March 2013
6. March 2013–April 2013
7. May 2013–June 2013
8. June 2013–July 2013
9. July 2013–September 2013
10. September 2013–November 2013
11. November 2013–December 2013
12. December 2013–February 2014
13. February 2014–March 2014
14. April 2014–May 2014
15. June 2014–November 2014
16. December 2014–January 2015
17. February 2015–May 2015
18. May 2015–July 2015
19. August 2015–January 2016
20. February 2016–September 2016
21. September 2016–September 2017
22. October 2017–June 2019
23. June 2019–September 2020
24. September 2020–September 2021
25. September 2021–November 2022
26. November 2022–May 2024


Robert L. Gordon IV

Can you please either take full protection off or revert to a version not by a indef-blocked sockmaster? I suggest this one. --NeilN 13:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't see a difference, besides the sentence about him being in Kappa Alpha Psi, which doesn't seem particularly problematic. I'll downgrade to semi-protection to allow editors to improve the article during AfD if desired, but I'm pinging Black Kite, who protected the article. Black Kite is surely more familiar with the situation than I am, so if he or she wishes to take it back to full protection, I won't object. --BDD (talk) 13:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. The tags were also different and not quite applicable. --NeilN 13:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:RFD#Cromulent

Well that was a lovely way to close it. Made me smile, anyway. Thanks, you made my day (not sarcastic). Si Trew (talk) 22:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

New question raised regarding Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton/April 2015 move request

Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

About some redirects recreated on a discussion you closed

Hey BDD, just wanted to give you a heads-up that it seems all of the redirects nominated at a discussion you closed, Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 6#Category:Songs written by Rolf Haris, Category:Rolf Haris songs, have been recreated. I was thinking of nominating these redirects for speedy deletion criterion G4, but based on your closing statement, I'm not sure if another administrator would accept these nominations. Steel1943 (talk) 03:19, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Hard to say. They're soft redirects now instead of hard, so not exactly G4 material. The CfD crowd has traditionally been conservative about keeping category redirects. I've seen some more recent decisions where they seemed willing to accept them, though people who followed my notifications on that discussion definitely came down on the delete side. G4 if you'd like, but I think further discussion should take place at CfD either way. --BDD (talk) 12:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like JamesBWatson proactively resolved this themselves. Not sure if anyone tagged those redirects, but either way, they've been re-deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
This looked to me like a straightforward G4 deletion, but from what you and Steel1943 say, it is perhaps not quite so clear-cut. To me, the distinction between soft and hard directs doesn't seem to make enough difference to invalidate G4, but if consensus is that it does, then I won't quarrel. For what it's worth my own tendency is to leave redirects unless they are grossly inappropriate, and I would not have !voted for deletion had I taken part in the discussion, but in taking admin actions I try to follow consensus, even when my own preference is against consensus. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I've never seen consensus on the question either way, and I don't do much speedy deletion work, so take my position with a grain of salt. --BDD (talk) 11:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Please help with a move

Hi, BDD - I am in the process of moving the essay into main space but while I was looking up the procedure for moving the TP, Jytdog had created one. Now I can't do the move. Can you please help me? Thank you in advance. Atsme 16:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

PS - would it be ok if I just copied and pasted it over to the new TP? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atsme (talkcontribs) 16:30, 13 May 2015‎
No, Atsme, please don't copy and paste! Bad bad bad. Just let me know which page you want to move and where you want to move it and I'll help you out. --BDD (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok - I reverted it. The page Jytdog already created is here: Wikipedia_talk:Advocacy_ducks. What I want moved over there is here: User_talk:Atsme/sandbox_Advocacy_ducks I tried it but it wouldn't let me because Jytdog already created the page before I finished doing all the moving. Atsme 16:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, just the talk page? It looks like you made Misplaced Pages:Advocacy ducks by copying and pasting too. Mind if I just move User:Atsme/sandbox Advocacy ducks over Misplaced Pages:Advocacy ducks, talk pages included? --BDD (talk) 16:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I used the moved page tool on my dashboard to move the main essay - thought the TP would move with it, but it didn't. Please do whatever you need to do - I've been at this for 4 hours trying to figure it out and have gotten nowhere. m( Atsme 16:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Ta-da! I think I figured out a neat solution. The page is live at Misplaced Pages:Advocacy ducks. Its talk page is what Jytdog created earlier today, but it also has an archive of previous discussion that moved over from your sandbox page. User:Atsme/sandbox Advocacy ducks and its talk page are redirects to the Misplaced Pages-space page, though if you'd like, I can delete them. How's that look? --BDD (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
*<:o) Nearly perfect!! Thank you. Just one thing, though. I wanted the Talk Page to go with it, not just a link, because the prelim consensus is important and based on the very first comments on the new TP, it really needs to be included. I'm also trying to figure out how to get all the history in the history box so that it doesn't show up as separate links beneath the main header, which is what took me so long to get a TP going. Could I manually move that one section (prelim consensus) with a Moved from my talk page box? Atsme 17:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Hm. Well, I didn't want to just nuke Jytdog's comments from earlier today, and the talk page pre-move had already gotten well beyond the 75K standard for when it's time to archive a talk page. Talk pages are archived all the time; is this so bad? You could certainly start a new section drawing attention to the archive and your thoughts on the previous discussion. --BDD (talk) 17:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, good plan. I'll just link to it, but I wasn't sure how long the connection to the sandbox was allowed to remain. Thank you so much for your help. Atsme

Oh, it started out in your sandbox, and the old title is now an {{R from move}}, so that's fine. Take it from me as a regular RfD admin—as long as you want the old names redirecting, they will. If you ever want them not to, they can easily be deleted. --BDD (talk) 18:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)