Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:04, 12 November 2006

Scam Watch Warning: There is an on-going scam marketing the creation, improvement, or protection of Misplaced Pages articles. See this scam warning for detailed information. If you've been scammed please send details to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org to help others who could be future victims of this scam.

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless there's a better place for them. Please read the following helpful hints before posting:

• Misplaced Pages is a volunteer curated encyclopedia. That means it is not a social networking site, a place for self-promotion, a marketing medium or a free web host. You are expected to be familiar with the goals of this project before you post here.
• Think. Use common sense. Read this before posting; failure to do so may result in your posts being ignored or mocked.
• If you wish to discuss your link additions, I advise you to be read our conflict of interest and spam policies before posting. These pages contain information about the appropriateness of link additions.
• I prefer to be contacted here (as opposed to email) where possible. You're much more likely to get a prompt response.
• I do not consider unblock or undeletion requests sent via email. Please refer to Misplaced Pages:Guide to appealing blocks to appeal your block. You may request undeletion here.
• Off-wiki evidence of undisclosed paid editing must not be posted here. These, and complex cases of paid editing will not be acted upon. In both cases, please email paid-en-wp wikipedia dot org.

Barnstar pour vous

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your tireless contributions to the WP:XFD processes, I would like to present you with this barnstar. Your efforts are most certainly appreciated. Brad Beattie 10:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. MER-C 10:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Pick your brains, if I may

Just trying to work this out and hoped you had some idea. Is there any reason you can think of as to why View From Heaven wasn't speedy deleted when I tagged it about ten hours ago? Usually what I do is leave it there even if someone contests it (and leaves the article substantially as it was) and then take it to AfD if it remains. This I do because I presume an admin has agreed with the argument given on the talk page. Or is it because of a backlog? I'm just trying to work out how it works with them. I tagged a few more before this, and they were gone within minutes. I see you are very wise to the ways, so thought I'd gather your opinion. Hope you don't mind. :) Bubba hotep 12:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The author removed the speedy tag twice, which he is not allowed to do. Anyone else can remove it. I've !voted speedy delete and replaced the tag half an hour ago. Let's hope the admins are paying attention I've tagged stuff for speedy deletion at 2 pm where I live, without them being deleted before I go to bed (9:30 pm). Just today, I tagged something, only to see it disappear in one minute flat. MER-C 13:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is certainly inconsistent. Still, if there is a backlog, what can you do. Maybe we should all run for admin! Bubba hotep 13:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of which, CAT:SPEEDY is now ove 150 pages. And unsourced/untagged/unlicensed/orphaned fair use/replacable fair use/no rationale is clogged up even further. Sigh. MER-C 13:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've just tagged a Brazilian spam article (written in Portuguese) and yet the user still continues to add to the page without even contesting it. Bubba hotep 13:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

He probably couldn't understand the speedy notice. Then again, who knows what goes on in the minds of n00bs? MER-C 09:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask your professional opinion on this one: Ephtée. I tagged it for speedy-spam last night and this morning the tag has mysteriously "disappeared" - well, actually, not a mystery: an anon IP did it. And the notices on the user talk page are gone as well. I still think it's spammy, although it has changed somewhat. I (temporarily) tagged it with "ad" and "primary sources" but am tempted to put the speedy back on. If you're busy, don't worry - and I will try not to make a habit of this! :) Bubba hotep 09:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying {{db-corp}}. MER-C 09:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Good call. I will keep an eye on it. Apart from that, 100% success on the remaining speedy hangers-on from last night for me - now all red-links. ;) Bubba hotep 09:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Destil Trappers

I expanded the article, please remove speedy deletion. Cheers, Knurftendans 09:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Done. MER-C 09:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Knurftendans 09:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Deprodding Social conditioning

Whatever it is, it isn't a neologism. Google hits are quite a lot and they include JSTOR academic citations. The term is also present in several other Wiki articles that I've now linked. --Mereda 18:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I got a dumb problem

A user named Squibman reverted (rv) a change i made too the Ares I article. He/she removed the "space shuttle" part of the link that refers to the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster after i had put it back. I really don't want to get into a edit war of the proper link name or title or whatever. Is there anyway i can get a little backup from you? I'm going to try and explain it to him/her, but i don't think it will work.--aceslead 21:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd wait for a while. It's too early (GMT and American time). That article hasn't been edited for 11 hours and you're the last editor, so there's a possibility that this could already be resolved.

By the way, it's rvv that's used as a shorthand for reverting vandalism. MER-C 08:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Speedying SFDs

It's not a good idea to tag matters already under consideration by one "process" as "speediable" by another; it gives the appearance of 'venue shopping', and carries the risk of the two coming simultaneously to different conclusion. Better just to let it be closed at SFD, speedily or otherwise. Alai 04:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Most of my deletion debate experience is from AFD, where the most effective (and probably only) way to get a speedy deletion is to tag the article for speedy deletion. Same goes for MFD. I just assumed that was OK at SFD, but I am now convinced that tagging at SFD isn't necessary. MER-C 08:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't have thought it was a great idea in those cases either, though I'm more of an "occasional visitor" to those, so I can't swear to what's the practice there. (Just to be clear, I've no objection to it being tagged for speedying before it's raised at *FD.) Alai 22:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, may I interject? My interest in this discussion is twofold – firstly, to gain experience of other areas of Misplaced Pages. It is vast, I'm sure you will agree. So hearing from you (Alai) about SFD (I had to look it up!) is informative for a start. Secondly, I have come to know MER-C (and, this is niggling me, is it mer-k or mer-see?... anyway...) through our exploits in CSD and AfD, and in 99% of the cases - speedy is the way to go. There are only so many times you can see the spam and vanity pages pile up, if they were all to go to AfD, nobody would ever get any real work done - and that is a fact. We all (three here, and thousands elsewhere) have the best interests of Misplaced Pages at heart, all have our methods, but I think MER-C has perfected it to a tee. You are both the salt of the Misplaced Pages earth! Cheers. Bubba hotep 23:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of spam, I'd like some key phrases which I could use to identify userspace spam and Myspace pages on Misplaced Pages. The current list is here. MER-C 03:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

India Havers

Hi there; you have prodded this article. It already had a {{speedy}} tag - perhaps there was an overlap in timing. I have removed your tag, but please feel free to replace it if you feel it's best.--Anthony.bradbury 09:08, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Just in case the speedy got contested. I'm watching it. MER-C 09:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Veruca's book information

Could you please re-input Veruca Salt's information from the original 1964 book? --Angie Y. 17:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. MER-C 02:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

My user page

Hey - I noticed you reverted vandalism on my user page. Thanks MER-C! --Anthony5429 03:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. MER-C 03:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks from me, too MER-C. I'm very impressed with how quickly you whacked that one! Thanks again, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 18:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/The_NESkimos

Hello, could I ask you to review your vote on The Neskimos Article? Arguments for keeping have been added. Thanks!

Sanctusorium 20:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

That particular AfD is attracting a lot of new users. Please don't canvas !votes. I reckon the result will be no consensus though I'll leave it to whoever the closing admin is. MER-C 01:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

My talk page

What is the problem? Your summary was dishonest, you reverted an entire page not just one comment.

Check the history, I have a fixed IP and I clean my discussion page up regularly.

Thanks.195.82.106.244 07:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)