User talk:Selket/Archive/6

Archives

WP:Peer review/Concussion

Hey Selket, I wondered if I could ask a favor. I noticed you're one of the only active contributors at WikiProject Neuroscience/Contributors, and I'd love it if you could comment at the review of concussion. There have been several comments on the writing, but no one has really thoroughly evaluated the accuracy. Any help you could offer would be very much appreciated. Thanks, delldot talk 10:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emedicine.com

Hi Selket, while reading up on spam I saw your post as follows: "www.emedicine.com seems to be popping up everywhere. The unobtrusive ads are not bad in and of themselves, but it fails WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided #1 in most articles it is linked from." I am not necessarily either for or against links to this site yet, as I have seen them, and I may have linked to a page on it after seeing others, maybe even administrators, do so, but I have just started to study the situation more deeply since seeing your thoughtful post. Can you explain any more about the situation for this website? And is there an alternative medical site that is better accepted? Sounds like you are a long-timer user and guru here. ReasonableLogicalMan(Talk 03:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Numbered Bridge Image for SF Bay

Curious to know if the two bridges of the northern bay were excluded purposely... The Caruinez bridge and the Benicia-Martinez bridge... Cheers --Ikyork (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy RFA anniversary

In UTC, it was yesterday. We just happened to have been promoted on the same day; I was not expecting to field two RFA's at once! I hope that you'll come back and help sometime soon. bibliomaniac 15 Do I have your trust? 21:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you back. bibliomaniac 1 5 21:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United States Supreme Court oringinal jurisdiction cases

Typo—"oringinal" instead of "original." Postdlf (talk) 18:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing it now, thanks. --Selket ^Talk 18:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Typo'd version now deleted. Postdlf (talk) 18:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions (Burmese)

I have responded to your comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Burmese). Kaldari (talk) 18:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Hanau

How do you get keep out of 7 delete suggestions (not votes) and 5 keeps, one of which was the subject and another was a sock of the subject? Toddst1 (talk) 23:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I counted 6 and 6 if we discount the possible sockpuppet, 7-6 if we don't. I think the reluctance of other admins to close it speaks to the closeness of the discussion, which should default to keep. Perhaps "no consensus: default to keep" would have been better, but the end effect would have been the same. But don't forget that it is not just the numbers on each side that matter, it's their arguments based on policy. Many !voters of "delete" suggested that the article could be recreated better. If so, then it can just be made better and there is no reason to get rid of the history. --Selket ^Talk 23:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. Thanks for your clarification. Toddst1 (talk) 00:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock cleared

FYI: User talk:77.42.190.228, since you accepted to unblock on User talk:ForVandalism. :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --Selket ^Talk 19:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHEN WILL IT EVER END?

Dear Selket, First let me thank you for a fair and impartial decision in regard to the Mark Hanau bio. I fully agree with you that EVERYONE should leave the article alone until tempers have cooled down.

Sadly, the two parties involved in the vendetta don't seem to be in agreement.

Today they edited the article cutting it to pieces. The ALRA section was completely removed . I provided four references for ALRA. The school prospectus ( an independent published source). A Kent library archive. All the issues of Stage and Television Today from that period and the Companies House documents of incorporation. If the prospectus is not an independent source then it must indicate Mark Hanau had total control over its content. A position of absolute power in ALRA. Either way it proves beyond any doubt that Mark Hanau was Chairman of ALRA.

I have put VANDALISM tags on these two indoviduals talk pages.

Must I spend the rest of my life fighting the vendetta attacks of these people? When will it ever stop? Can you do anything, before I go insane? Aimulti (talk) 23:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have refered this to AN/I. Please direct any other issues there. --Selket ^Talk 01:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Aimulti (talk) 01:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-)

[moved to user page]

Thank you very much. I'm glad someone's watching. --Selket ^Talk 16:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Your deletion request on Image:Gordon Parks High School (Griggs).JPG

Hello, Selket. You have new messages at Parent5446's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Parent5446 ^{(t n e l)} 20:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for the rapid response to my notes. Should I remove the warning that I placed on User talk:142.27.176.215, since the block and the warning are for essentially the same behavior? Bwrs (talk) 21:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to delete it at this point, but it's up to you. --Selket ^Talk 21:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to avoid giving the incorrect impression that he did it again after i warned him, when in fact he didn't. That's all. Bwrs (talk) 00:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:New pelion hut view.jpg

Has been restored, good catch- will put back on New Pelion Hut as bot removed it... SkierRMH (talk) 03:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

St -Annes-on-the-Sea

I requested deletion as it was a typo I had created, after "St" there is a space and a hyphen. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 03:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, fixed now. --Selket ^Talk 03:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Lord's Prayer

Since this AfD ended in a merge, the article should have been converted to a redirect to Sign-off rather than being deleted. I have restored Indian Lord's Prayer and changed it to a redirect. Hope this helps. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I was going to recreate it as a redirect but I must have forgotten. Thanks. --Selket ^Talk 04:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From the pavilion article

It wasnt advertising... its just a page on an online management game. which part of it was offensive? other online sports managment games have very similar pages. ill remove anything u found to be advertising.

Sully89 (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have redone, and removed any possible correlation to advertising. No benefits of membership have been mentioned, or prices. Please message me before deleting article completly if it still doesnt comply, or at least outline which sections are offensive...

Sully89 (talk) 07:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy

You just quickly blocked me as not even looking carefully at the case and went off for your other business. I feel very annoyed about your conduct on this because you did not even give a common block sign. That is inappropriate. You also did not care to see the obvious sockpuppeting. I've done almost everything to resolve the case, but am treated by you the same. I don't know you, but you do not give me any credibility as an admin. Good luck for your well-being. --Appletrees (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Вклад Разрушитель

Спасибо большое SelketBot! Это случайная будет продолжаться вечно! Так говорит Modnar Redrosid. Жираф. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ModnarRedrosid (talk • contribs) 01:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what that means. --Selket ^Talk 04:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iconoplast

Hiya, just an FYI re: this comment. Not sure s/he's capable of that. IP is currently blocked for 12 hours from spam on the second account they created when the main one was blocked. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've updated the message to reflect this. --Selket ^Talk 19:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saab Lofton

Thanks, I was just going to ask for a semi-protect as well. You read my mind :) -- phoebe / (talk to me) 06:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

N.P. --Selket ^Talk 06:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comfort women

the summary was clear.

one was a dutch page not in english. see general policy on use of english reference. one was immediately above. NONE included the actual quotation in context to prove the point ... which I then added.

actually the one that I added a quote is perfectly suitable to prove the point (being the Judgment International Military Tribunal for the Far East. the purpose is to prove the point after all not.

thank you --60.42.252.205 (talk) 17:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are indeed right. Very sorry. --Selket ^Talk 17:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-English sources are acceptable and the anon blanked chunk of properly sourced materials yesterday on Japanese war crimes. Therefore, I gave him warnings. You can't remove it by your own.--Caspian blue (talk) 17:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doll Domination (album)

Hi Selket, the reason why I had deleted all information off the page was I wanted to delete it because the album title was not correct (all though they had previously confirmed it). Sorry I am new to Wikipedia. Anyways I would appreciate if possible you can delete the page. Thank you.

Done --Selket ^Talk 18:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Play Party

Please do not revert changes without discussion first, that would be vandalism. As there is an active discussion in the talk section, you might try adding your opinions there before reverting constructive changes. Thanks. In this specific case, an editor added a request for cites in five places in an example list of rules. whomever put the original exmaple list in did not intend to represent them as facts, but as an example that play parties often have rules, and the kinds of things representative. Perhaps it was from a play party that he attended -- who knows. But asking or requiring citations for an example list, especially asking for cites on each and every line item, it not needed. Please feel free to disuss this on the talk page wiht myself and others before jumping to conclusions. Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.34.245 (talk) 21:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should not go around deleting citation templates. The most constructive way to resolve this would be for you to find a source. "Universally recognized" is not a reliable source. --Selket ^Talk 21:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the comments? Did you read the numerous sources I listed. Did you notice that it did not say "universally recognized" anywhere in the article? Did you see my comment where I agreed with another editor that the use of Universal was not appropriate. (which is why it was not in the article?) Thanks,