Jump to content

User talk:WJBscribe: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 5 thread(s) (older than 5d) to User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 9.
Akliman (talk | contribs)
please help
Line 144: Line 144:


WJBScribe, thank you very much for your co-nomination. It meant a lot to me, coming from such a respected Wikipedian as yourself. Unfortunately, as I'm sure you know, the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! Thank you again for everything, [[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 05:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
WJBScribe, thank you very much for your co-nomination. It meant a lot to me, coming from such a respected Wikipedian as yourself. Unfortunately, as I'm sure you know, the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! Thank you again for everything, [[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 05:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

== Please help! ==
A few months ago, you protected the [[Temporal single-system interpretation]] article (at the request of Coelacan, if I remember). Recently, another administrator unprotected it. "Watchdog07," whose edits to the page were what prompted Coelacan (a non-party to the dispute) to ask for protection, promptly reverted the article to his preferred version--without agreement from other editors, without consultation, and without warning. This is likely to cause an edit war. There are also '''serious''' [[WP:BLP]] issues involved here. [[User:Akliman|andrew-the-k]] 22:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:59, 5 August 2007

22:46, Friday 3 January 2025

User:WJBscribe
User:WJBscribe
User talk:WJBscribe
User talk:WJBscribe
User:WJBscribe/Gallery
User:WJBscribe/Gallery
User:WJBscribe/Barnstars
User:WJBscribe/Barnstars
User:WJBscribe/Drafts
User:WJBscribe/Drafts




Hi! Please leave a message and I'll get back to you...

Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have a question or need help. I'll do my best and can probably point you in the right direction if it isn't something I can sort out myself.

Will

Smile

Scribe, I'd like to request the User be blocked for this edit. Repeatedly warned, edit-warred, has brought two 3RR cases and told they are being disruptive. Is there also a way to check the IP address of the User to see if it is my troll? --David Shankbone 16:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

scribe, if you have the time please look into davidshankbone's recent reverting. last time you looked into it there was a possibility that he thought he was reverting vandalism, but after your warning he continued reverting. i looked into 3rr and the vandalism has to be very obvious vandalism to qualify as an exception. he calls me his troll i believe to cloud the issue. Chichichihua 17:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Scribe, will you run the IP check for me? They continue to edit war. The old IP, 71.112 (and its variants), was based in Snohomish, WA. --David Shankbone 16:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't check its IP, only users with checkuser access can do that. It may be able to persuade one - I'll give it a go. But I'm not convinced they're the same person myself - their interest is focused on that one article and their issue with the image appears not be quality but whether it is representative of chihuahuas. Knowing nothing about that breed I have difficulty assessing the validity of that argument. WP:AGF may be the best way forwards - perhaps both images could be used on the article with captions that make clear the difference between them? WjBscribe 17:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand what you are saying, but the fact is that there is consensus from five editors on the page not to use the photo in question, and I don't see any cause to reward their edit warring. Nobody wants the crappy photo up there except this editor, who really doesn't want my photo up, and the uploader who likely owns the dog in question. Five editors against two is pretty clearly consensus. I'd like the IP check just to know; the behavior is exactly the same. --David Shankbone 17:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hello. Two images uploaded by User:Mhart54com, Image:Asdsasd.gif and Image:Sasukesharingan0112.jpg are improperly tagged as public domain images created by the user, yet there does not seem (at least according to the options Twinkle is giving me) to be a relevant CSD tag to place. Do I change the license and tag accordingly for a lack of a fair-use rationale, or is there another option? Much appreciated. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think CSD G12 just about covers those. In less clear cases you might have to nominate images for deletion at WP:IFD. WjBscribe 23:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Thanks again. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:)


Manticore Talk | Contributions 02:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Confused about deletion

hey, i recently logged into my account and noticed that an article i had posted about OUR Fest had recently been deleted. i was wondering if there was any way to undelete the article, i was planning on writing about the history of the festival , how it got started and everything since it is a local show thats been going on for years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ourfest (talkcontribs).

Articles can be undeleted. I need to know more about this particular article before I can comment though. What was it called? WjBscribe 15:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i believe it was titled "RE-Productions" ..i only had set up a small portion of it. Re-productions is the company that formed OUR Fest. It was just a set up to the fest, not a promotion for the company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ourfest (talkcontribs).

The admin who deleted the page was RHaworth, you might want to discuss this with him. Looking at the deleted article though, it contains no assertion as to why the company is important - that is to say why an encyclopedia should have an article about it. Have a look at our policy on notability - WP:Notability. Multiple reliable sources are needed to confirm the significance of the article. If you can provide URLs for reliable independent sources that discuss the company or festival (e.g. media coverage), then it might be possible to undelete the article but as it stood it did not meet our criteria for inclusion. WjBscribe 17:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Men with unusually large penis; deletion discussion

Hi, Will. I'm writing to you because of your participation in the above discussion for deletion. Editor meco, who has reached the 3RR limit today, has taken to posting his silly list, now table, at the talk page for the Human penis size article. He could no longer add it to the article because I deleted it and he cannot revert my deletion without being blocked. I was tempted to remove the table from the talk page, but I thought to write to you first and ask what can be done. I've made notations there before and after the table that there is no discussion for this table because it is not on a page and has no page of its own, and it does not belong in the article or in the Pornography project. Please give it a look. Thank you. 72.68.123.113 20:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CHU/U

Hey just a question- what do you consider a "well-established user"? How many edits? i said 21:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has depended on the crat a bit. Some like a couple of hundred edits, others just want to see some non-trivial edits to the mainspace. Usually needs to be a couple of months old. The requirement is usually relaxed if someone wants to harmonise with accounts on other wikis too. WjBscribe 21:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So do you ever note when they have very few edits, or do you trust the renaming crat to make their own decision after checking? i said 21:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I flag it up if I think it might be an issue. I prob would have done for Lastman ← Lastman cn if it hadn't been for the fact they want the name to match accounts on other Wikis. WjBscribe 21:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That request is what provoked me to ask. You might want to mention something more specific in relation to this on the proposal you and Deskana have worked on. i said 21:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the guideline is going with: "existed for several months and made non-trivial contributions to the encyclopedia". WjBscribe 22:16, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another question, same topic. When there is a malformed request, do you remove it or format it? i said 06:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bird name redirect question

Hi. Can you let me know why you feel Atelornis crossleyi should redirect to Gundlach's Hawk? Thanks. SP-KP 21:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to non-existent pages are speedy deleted under Criterion R1 of the speedy deletion policy. I came across such a broken redirect (it pointed to Rufous-headed Ground-roller) and looked at its history and saw that it previously pointed to Gundlach's Hawk. I restored the old redirect as I knew of no better target. If this is not a good redirect target you can either (1) change the redirect to point somewhere else or (2) nominate it for deletion at WP:RFD. Hope that helps. WjBscribe 21:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not sure either of those solutions are really that suitable - the page should exist, as a redirect to Rufous-headed Ground-roller, but that page doesn't exist yet. Deleting it would be wrong therefore, but so would redirecting it to that page, as you correctly point out - however, redirecting to Gundlach's Hawk would also be wrong as this is a totally different species (family, in fact). What's the best way out of this? SP-KP 22:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you either need to create a short article at Rufous-headed Ground-roller or nominate the redirect for deletion until that article is created by someone else. WjBscribe 22:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone for the former. Hopefully it's not too short not to be deleted otherwise we'll be back to square one! All the best and thanks for the advice. SP-KP 22:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an administrator who has been involved with the long-term disputes about the article Battle of Washita River (which is still under full protection), I want to inform you of the two related user-conduct RfCs that have now been certified:

Thanks for your past efforts in trying to help us deal with the disputes about this article. --Yksin 20:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. Thanks. --Yksin 02:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.

Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 31 30 July 2007 About the Signpost

From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania
Report on Citizendium Response: News from Citizendium
User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean"
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signature:the REDUX!!

WJB-Thanks for the advice-here's the result!--Xterra1 (talk)(Work) 02:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete monstrous

Per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 30, please undelete Monstrous (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and allow the RfD to finish. This isn't the same as the Monstrous (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) which was deleted in the RfD Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 27 log you cited in your deletion of monstrous. Also, the discussion for monstrous has not formed a consenus to delete, so I feel your deletion is not appropriate. BigNate37(T) 04:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. WjBscribe 11:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! BigNate37(T) 01:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1] OCD ;-) ? ~ Wikihermit 00:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perish the thought... ;) WjBscribe 00:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WJBScribe, thank you very much for your co-nomination. It meant a lot to me, coming from such a respected Wikipedian as yourself. Unfortunately, as I'm sure you know, the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! Thank you again for everything, Elonka 05:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please help!

A few months ago, you protected the Temporal single-system interpretation article (at the request of Coelacan, if I remember). Recently, another administrator unprotected it. "Watchdog07," whose edits to the page were what prompted Coelacan (a non-party to the dispute) to ask for protection, promptly reverted the article to his preferred version--without agreement from other editors, without consultation, and without warning. This is likely to cause an edit war. There are also serious WP:BLP issues involved here. andrew-the-k 22:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]