User talk:Athaenara

Wednesday

18 December 2024

21:54 UTC

This is a Wikipedia user page.
If you find this page on a site other than Wikipedia you are viewing a mirror site.
The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Athaenara.

Template:Multicol

Template:Multicol-break

VANDALISM THREAT

Moderate

__

Template:Multicol-end

Current Requests for Adminship

Name	Ends	S	O	N	S%	Report
Tcncv	02:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)	89	3	1	96.7%	report
Kww 3	Unknown	72	29	6	71.3%	report
MLauba	11:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)	41	1	1	97.6%	report
The Earwig	02:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)	56	0	0	100.0%	report
RayAYang	21:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)	28	13	2	68.3%	report
Tango 2	Unknown	10	47	7	17.5%	report

(table generated by transclusion of User:ST47/RFA)

Email

An account for Wikipedia-related email to me exists. However, I check its inbox infrequently, perhaps once or twice a month. I receive few messages there and send none. If you seek my attention for any Wikipedia-related matter, please post your concerns on this page (e.g. here). — Athaenara ✉ 22:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: I do not hang out on IRC. — Athaenara ✉ 14:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archive notes

→ in re: User talk:Athaenara/Archives

Archive 000: inactive Adminship discussions

Archive 00: inactive deletion discussions

Archive 0: inactive Did you know? and signature discussions

Archive 1: miscellaneous inactive discussions

Archive 2: inactive BLP discussions

Archive 3: inactive WP:3O discussions

Archives 4, 5, 6: inactive COI discussions

WP:Assume no clue

→ in re: Wikipedia:Assume no clue

I'm going to start working on this... I think you're more in the know than I on what that means, so I'd love to have a convo with you about this sort of stuff :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 16:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought was that you raised this here because you read the Words of Wisdom on my user page where I quoted a January 2007 post (diff) by JonHarder. Was that it? — Athaenara ✉ 22:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed :-)

Also, you're a regular at 3O, so I'd probably trust and/or agree with most of what you had to say ;-) Xavexgoem (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC) WP:ANC - oooh, shameless plug![reply]

A discussion last month on User talk:Airwolfe31#Unblock my account is an example where it was reasonable to assume both good faith and no clue, but one user's stance against the new editor became rather extreme (related discussion). — Athaenara ✉ 11:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Athaenara's Day!

Athaenara has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Athaenara's day!
For unflagging civility and your work at giving third opinions and mediating,
enjoy being the Star of the day, Athaenara!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac 1 5
02:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: This is the special holiday issue for January, commemorating the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. I've chosen you because of your outstanding skill at mediation and civility. bibliomaniac 1 5 02:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you very much! — Athaenara ✉ 02:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Well deserved! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you, Ruhrfisch, and good to see you! — Athaenara ✉ 03:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinions

I noticed you made a small edit to Talk:Jussi Halla-aho‎ after I requested more info for a Third opinion. I just wanted to say that you are welcome to provide a third opinion on that article if you feel inclined (I couldn't really make sense of it, so feel free to take it). In fact, you are more than welcome to provide an "alternate third opinion" on any discussion to which I write, as I've seen your work and this project can always use more of it! Best regards, (EhJJ)^TALK 00:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article talk pages to which WP:3O draws attention often have problems, so I sometimes do refactoring and archiving for long-neglected pages. — Athaenara ✉ 01:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: NowCommons

→ in re: this message about images moved to Commons

Politizer ^talk/_contribs has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Ah, that looks perfect, thank you so much! I totally forgot to update the links; thanks for taking the time to correct those for me. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thanks for the cookie! — Athaenara ✉ 18:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice and comment

Hi Athaenara. I was wondering if I could get some input from you on an issue with the Telescope article. I've been involved with the article since back in August when I attempted to help resolve an edit war over the Telescope#History section of the article. I entered the discssion toward the end of this section of the talk pages: Talk:Telescope/Archive 1#Arbitray section break.

Undoubtedly one of the complicating factors was that one or more editors had trouble reigning in their emotions and behaving civily. Regardless, we achieved a compromise somewhere around the middle of August and things quieted down for a while. Then, in the middle of October, a long-time-editor that was not actively involved during the earlier conflict, came along and deleted the material that was the subject of the conflict. Needless to say, that started everything back up again and led to this discussion: Talk:Telescope#Undue balance. The most recent discussion can be found here: Talk:Telescope#Accuracy and reliability.

I've taken the position that there is no NPOV issue here and only a question of whether or not the passage in question could reasonably be included in the history section. I also believe, but have not stated it outright, that it was inappropriate for the editor to delete the material, that it should be returned to the article, and that in the future the editors ought to agree that changes to this apparently contentious material should be made only when agreed to through consensus.

This is what I wanted your input on. Could you assess and give me some feedback on how I have handled and interpreted this issue?

I realize that you are busy and have many other issues to work on, but if you could find the time to give me some feedback, it would be much appreciated. Thanks. Mmyotis ^{(^^o^^)} 06:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at it more closely when I can, later this week. — Athaenara ✉ 16:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After studying the article's edit history and the discussions, I concluded that the information properly belongs, if anywhere, in an optics or history of optics article. I can't really assess your personal behavior. Do you think you've been pushing too hard? — Athaenara ✉ 01:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you notes

→ in re: {{db-g7}} deletion request

for prompt help while dealing with categories Dc76\^talk 15:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. — Athaenara ✉ 16:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

→ in re: this barnstar's move to Wikimedia Commons

		The Barnstar of Thankfulness for Minor Things Needing to Thanked For
		Thanks for deleting the barnstar image page. The New MIKE moral

—Preceding undated comment was added at 23:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC).

You're welcome, and thanks for the star. — Athaenara ✉ 04:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it. It's the award I give out. The New Mikemoral^talk_contribs 08:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LIRR Station images

→ in re: my post on DanTD's talk page (User talk:DanTD/Archive. January 2009#Now Commons)

Thanks for the deletions and moves. I've tried to remove more of them from articles I didn't want them to be in, and I wish I could've renamed them first. ----DanTD (talk) 00:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome (replied further on your talk page). — Athaenara ✉ 04:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

→ in re: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RegentsPark

Thank you for the trust you placed in me by supporting my RfA (which passed and, apparently, I am now an admin!). I will do my best to continue to act in a way that is consistent with the policies of wikipedia as well with our common desire to build and perfect this repository of human knowledge; and can only hope that you never feel that your trust was misplaced. Thanks again! --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 23:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re:Stick Candy

→ in re: third opinion on Talk:Stick candy#Please use "Discussion"

Hello Athaenara, I had seen the 3O mention of this article, and was wondering something that may save me time in the future. While I was putting a .txt file together with links to the MOS, External Links, etc. I noticed that you very quickly listed the links in an easy to read bulleted list. Is there a quick was to do this? Or, did you have to copy, and then insert all small and nowiki tags to each one? Thanks — Ched (talk) 08:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was all the labour-intensive way! — Athaenara ✉ 19:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I am so Glad you are still here, this is two years late:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		The Barnstar of Diligence may be awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service. This Barnstar is awarded to Athaenara for her tireless efforts to help create quality wikipedia articles. Thank you. (formerly travb, from the Firestone Liberian controversy) Ikip (talk) 19:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. — Athaenara ✉ 20:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to see you again. I don't think I ever thanked you enough for your assistance. Ikip (talk) 02:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD#I8 war!

→ in re: {{db-i8}} deletion requests

Heh, I got 2 internal errors because of you! ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few as well! I'm slower because my deletion summaries (e.g. here and here) include uploader and tagger links which need more time to format. — Athaenara ✉ 20:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I batch delete once I checked the license here and check a couple of commons licenses ^^ -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:AndrewAntaro

→ in re: AndrewAntaro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and A W Smith (attorney) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

You might want to consider User:AndrewAntaro for CSD G11; it's by the same person as created the recently speedied User:A W Smith (attorney), and appears to be part of what looks like a Mr. Antaro advertising campaign on wikipedia for his company. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added {{sockpuppet}} tags to the usertalk pages. — Athaenara ✉ 00:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess Mr. Antaro was hired by several companies to increase their internet presence. He has a website that outlines his services, but I wouldn't recommend visiting it, as it kept resizing the browser screen. Cheers! TNXMan 00:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

→ user 382589454 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User AndrewAntaro, citing "harassment" (diff), petitioned to change his username to 382589454 and apparently succeeded. — Athaenara ✉ 09:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baptismal.jpg

→ in re: this edit to image page (logs)

Ok thanks, my mistake, I was using Commons Helper for the first time and pressed the wrong button I guess. I'm learning new things everyday in this Wikipedia... --Alainr345 (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article deletion

→ in re: Amaxhelen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
→ see also:

Hello Athaenara,

I've noticed that the article, AMAX Information Technologies, I created was removed due to the reason that it contains blantant advertising. I am still new to creating articles on Wikipedia so I'm not aware if my writing crosses over any boundaries. I only wish to have an article for this company in a neutral point of view and yet, informative for others who are researching for this company. Can you provide me any tips or help what I would need to remove/revised in the contents of that article so it would be okay to have it up? Thank you. Amaxhelen (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Several suggestions were posted on your talk page. Have you read them? — Athaenara ✉ 21:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked over it and gotten some ideas how to improve the article. Is there a way I can retrieve the article to revise, and somehow test it out to make sure it's compliable (rather then keep reposting it live and having it tagged if it's still not following guidelines)? I would appreciate all the help I can get, thank you! Amaxhelen (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to post a request for suggestions on the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Text of the deleted article is in earlier revisions of your user subpage User:Amaxhelen/AMAX Information Technologies. — Athaenara ✉ 22:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Athaenara, thank you for the tip. I made a request there and on WikiProject trying to get some open opinions on the revised article draft I created on my subpage. Do you know normally how long would they check my request? Amaxhelen (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It depends entirely on whether it attracts the interest of any editors. There are more tips over at Articles for creation. — Athaenara ✉ 07:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments

I have raised comments you made in a past discussion here. To insure that I did not misrepresent you and your opinions, could you please look them over, and if you consider them inappropriate please let me know and I’ll strike them from my post. Thanks --Domer48_'fenian' 19:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleting my userpage

→ in re: {{db-u1}} request (log)

Thanks!--Dem393 (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of 'Eye of the Sports Guy' and 'B.S. Report' Podcasts

→ in re: my post on Jliverse's talk page

Thanks for your feedback re: the conflict of interest guidelines. I appreciate the concern. In this case, I don't have any relationship whatsoever to the show, its producers, the parent company, its host, the industry or even podcasting in general. Any help on making the page better would be appreciated. Thanks again. Jliverse (talk) 12:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, feel free to remove my post! — Athaenara ✉ 22:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolution check?

→ in re: image deletion

Hi. You just deleted File:ChicagoSpire 05 25 08.jpg, which I was just checking before deleting. That's fine - but the version on Commons is lower resolution than the one that was here. Please could you check that the resolutions are the same before deleting images? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I went to restore it after your message and found that you restored it long enough to upload the higher resolution image to Commons. Well done! — Athaenara ✉ 23:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shozam page deletion

→ in re: deleted article

Dear Athaenara,

Our Shozam Wiki page was deleted for "blatant advertising." However, we included credible, third-party sources in our article. Additionally, other software program similar to Shozam have not been deleted, including:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoshop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACDSee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalbum

Please advise as to why our page was deleted when we followed the reference guidelines, and other software programs are allowed, but not ours. Please consider relisting our Shozam article.

Regards, Kelly User: Kkneagu1

Kkneagu1 (talk) 22:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted {{Uw-coi}} information on your talk page regarding the conflict of interest guidelines (diff).

Did you read any of the linked explanatory pages? — Athaenara ✉ 22:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gema suara 17

→ in re: deleted article

Hi - I originally put all the tags and then only later the csd when i realised that the links at the base of the article had nothing to do with the group. We often have fly by edits of articles that come in english (usually very poor) or even Indonesian into the Indonesian project - and never hear from the editors again - it can be very frustrating at times as either their english is so poor that they do not understand either the notices or what is happening. Apologies for having muddied things by the tags and then the csd - probably should have left it with just one or the other - there are easily 100 articles in the indonesian project with similar issues - slowly trying to resolve them Satu Suro 01:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC) Just saw your delete - oh well another issue solved - but there are always more in the wings :( Satu Suro 01:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.jpg

→ in re: my post on Ahunt's talk page (image log)

Thanks for letting me know! I am putting all my pictures on Commons now, but migrating the old ones is a great help! - Ahunt (talk) 10:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:MBH2000/Florcello

→ in re: FLORCELLO / Florcello pages by MBH2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Could you pleaseItalic text explain how my article on Florcello submitted 03/16/09 is considered "blatent advertising"? How could it possibly be written in a more unbiased fashion ? I want to learn. Please take a look a the articles for Tuaca, Liquor Fogg, Sabra... If these articles are acceptable, please advise how I am offending the Wiki rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MBH2000 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted {{Uw-coi}} information on your talk page regarding the conflict of interest guidelines (diff). Did you read any of the linked explanatory pages? I see that Camaron and Dank55 have responded to your queries. Wikipedia:Articles for creation or the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard may be helpful as well. — Athaenara ✉ 01:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Team1up

→ in re: deleted articles by Team1up (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Why was my article that was created under manchvegasrollergirls was removed? We didn't advertise anything at all.? Team1up (talk) 22:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted {{Uw-coi}} information on your talk page regarding the conflict of interest guidelines (diff).

Did you read any of the linked explanatory pages? — Athaenara ✉ 22:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but i don’t see where the issue lies... If it was a typo then my bad... I was enthusiasm in redoing the wiki and getting it solid for a return. If my page is informative, contains what is needed as in references and link per last creation & is not a conflict of interest just a typo then why was it removed? It has every right to be there since it is a legit valid sport in Manchester nh. And I ask you if you check out New Hampshire Roller Derby who are the Nashua team for comparison, they have less info and there wiki has less info and there wiki needs work they won’t thru the same issue with wiki admin’s and they got it up why not us? Why not remove them? In fact if you look at any derby wiki you'll see the same amount of information is posted on any page and there all fine. Were all teams we all play roller derby and we all want people to know about us and on wiki. Were a part of NH were a part of Manchester & I’m requesting that it be reverted back to what it was. If not i want to know exactly on the page what is wrong and where so it can be fixed. Thanks for your time Team1up (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try articles for creation or the conflict of interest noticeboard. — Athaenara ✉ 22:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Site meets and exceeds all the requirements for a wiki page, it has loads of information w is legit.So again if i place it back up will you take it back down and claim it as adverts again ? Team1up (talk) 04:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your issues are not with me but with the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines which include Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). You are certainly free to try Deletion review as noted on Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. — Athaenara ✉ 05:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for ManchVegas Roller Girls

An editor has asked for a deletion review of ManchVegas Roller Girls. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Team1up (talk) 12:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Michael Covel

→ in re: DuvWork (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I have made changes to Michael Covel in order to better fit the guidelines set forth by Wikipedia. It is not my intent to create useless pages on Wikipedia. I am new to Wikipedia and just learning they correct style of writing for this Encyclopedia.

The other pages referencing Michael W. Covel and Michael W Covel where supposed to be tests on Sandbox and not published. I still do not know how to delete articles (can you?) that you did not intend to show on Wikipedia. I think the Michael Covel article (only the one Michael Covel article) is relevant and would serve the Wikipedia Community as a reference/resource for economic perspective. Any advice on how to make the article as neutral as possible would be greatly appreciated. I also want to be clear that I do not have a close connection to Michael Covel or any of his associates/affiliates. I found the content I read in is books relevant enough to share with others. Thank you! DuvWork (talk) 04:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Your first article has some advice. — Athaenara ✉ 05:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]