User talk:Closedmouth/Archive 10

Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12→Archive 15

Rayko/KRB

I'm puzzled by your recent edit to this article, and particularly the edit summary saying "prod is contested...". If you check that article's history, you will see I added a PROD notice to give people a chance to improve an article that clearly fails WP:BAND. How does adding a link to "Center Stage" and adding "He has dubbed his new persona the Country Rap SuperStar" to the end of a paragraph, address the issue of this band's notability or contest the PROD in any way? Astronaut (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, please ignore this. I should read the deletion policy with more care. Astronaut (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 03:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Mark Purayah

I have cleaned it up what do you think if it is not satisfactory tell me and I will clean it up again.--AKM73 (talk) 07:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Good job. Might want to work on your spelling, though ;) --Closedmouth (talk) 08:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey yes i could use some help if you dont mind.

Nilest (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

WoodWing Software

Hey. I'm about done adding stuff about WoodWing Software. Somewhere while I was editing to slammed a 'notable' on it. This is one of the first companies I created a profile on Wikipedia for, so I tried to read up on notability requirements as much as possible, and as far as I can see, they have been satisfied. Can you please provide feedback? I was uncertain if it would be frowned upon if I removed the template, so I left it be for now... Cheers! Siebrand (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Remove it if you feel it's unnecessary. --Closedmouth (talk) 06:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Why'd you remove my message?

Hello Closedmouth. I'd like to know why you removed the message I provided with the Prod2 template on Nathan Hawkes. I restored it because I thought my 2 cents on the proposed deletion was helpful, especially I provided a link to a Google search on the article subject to prove there are no sources that cover it. Oh, and by the way, I hope you don't take offense at me saying this, but the image of Jimbo Wales popping in and out of the window is a wee bit creepy. --Whip it! Now whip it good! 23:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, formatting error. --Closedmouth (talk) 06:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey Closedmouth. This is regarding the removal of the external links to audio interviews with Tony Martin, Shaun Micallef, Pete Smith and Alan Brough, on their respective pages in turn. I added the links because it is quite rare to find such in-depth, publically available audio interviews with these people, and they're mainly discussing their lives and careers, as opposed to just plugging their latest projects. They're quite insightful. I conducted these interviews personally, and posted them at my website (davidmgreen.com). I have permission to do this from the radio station they were originally broadcast on. Furthermore, I noticed someone else has posted an external link to my interview with The Late Richard Marsland on his page. I figured if there's a link to that one, why not have links to the others? Kind regards, davidthegreen. Davidthegreen (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing BLPs

Thank you very much for your work categorizing biographies of living people. It's very important work and your efforts have not gone unnoticed. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 10:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Temporary injunction and your use of my monobook script

Hi Closedmouth,

I have to let you know on your talk page that ArbCom has announced a temporary injunction against the "mass delinking of dates". You can still delink dates on an occasional basis; however, you may wish to be cautious and use the script only for its non-date functions until the issue is resolved by an RFC poll. You may wish to express your view on autoformatting and date linking in the RFC at: Wikipedia:Date_formatting_and_linking_poll.

Regards Lightmouse (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Already knew, but thanks anyway. Hope the damn thing's finished soon. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Nomination

MBisanz would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact MBisanz to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Closedmouth . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
Go-go gadget MiszaBot! --Closedmouth (talk) 07:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

what are you talking about?

I got this from you;

" Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Twat has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Closedmouth (talk) 07:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)"


sorry, but I have no idea what you are talking about, I've never even seen that page before, let alone made any changes to it.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.117.161 (talk) 19:59, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Dude, that was almost a year ago. Let it go. --Closedmouth (talk) 05:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: AWB

Thanks for letting me know, I appriciate this because I am new to this. I just found out about TypoScan before I read your message and I am going to go ahead and try that.--Christopher Kraus (talk) 15:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

No prob. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Closedmouth/Archive 10, Thenachoman has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for helping me out. --Thenachoman (talk) 13:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks2

Thanks for your help. --Thenachoman (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Closedmouth. You have new messages at Thenachoman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The section is "Question".

RFA congrats

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has
closed successfully and you are now an administrator!

Useful Links:
• Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide •
• Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR •
Your admin logs:
• blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

— Rlevse • Talk • 10:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much, I was worried all you 'crats had abandoned me ;) --Closedmouth (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

RfA closed as successful

The admins' t-shirt.

I hear congratulations are in order. Here, take this present. Enjoy! Oh, wait a minute: haven't you got work to be doing? - Jarry1250 (t, c) 10:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Jarry, and thanks to everyone who voted. It was nowhere near as painful as I thought it would be, and I'm glad I agreed to it. (I promise I won't be spamming your talk pages.) --Closedmouth (talk) 10:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Congrats also. PhilKnight (talk) 11:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Well done! --GedUK  12:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Welcome! That wasn't so bad! - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 12:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Don't let this make you think otherwise — you are still uncool as hell. :) — neuro(talk)(review) 10:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

FAC archive

RE: Closedmouth (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Boy Scouts of America" (Deleted because "this page is a relic of the old FAC archiving system, under which any new nomination would have occurred here; now, new nominations are created in subpages (i.e. /archivex) (CSD G6)". using TW)

what is this about? How are people to look up a FAC archive now? — Rlevse • Talk • 10:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Like it says in the nom, using the /archivex format. Made sense to me, but you might want to poke Maralia for details. --Closedmouth (talk) 10:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Uh, how are they supposed to look up the old noms? Did you move this nom? To where? Give me a link please. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Isn't he saying that they are now available under the current 'FAC/archive(1|2|...)' format? — neuro(talk)(review) 10:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I didn't delete any content or nominations or anything, just the redundant index. I'll undo it if you want me to. --Closedmouth (talk) 10:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
These deletions are only to old, no longer needed, redirect pages; the archives for the Boy Scouts of America FACs are still intact in articlehistory. (Click on articlehistory at the article talk page.) These deletions are not a problem. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Whew, I was a bit worried I'd made a huge mistake, thanks Sandy. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Unblock

It's considered bad form not to consult the original blocker before reverting him... Trust me, I know it's a troll. The diff posted was 3 months old, there is no way in hell anyone could find it without looking for it. Did you try doing a google search with the email adr (in quotes)? Hardly the easily offended type, I'd say... yandman 10:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I AGF'd at the behest of another user. A more specific block log might have helped. --Closedmouth (talk) 01:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I would have linked to the discussion on ANI (that followed her one and only post), but what with the whole archiving malarkey, it wouldn't have worked. I hope you don't mind me reblocking? yandman 10:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
No, go ahead, please. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: deletion of Petal (chakra)

You deleted Petal (chakra). It was better than the chakra article, and I would like it to be undeleted. Apparently it just had a link to nothing, but I am willing to clean it up if it is undeleted. (I am surprised there is such a ridiculous criteria for deletion: it is more helpful to fix or delete the link.)--Dchmelik (talk) 20:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll restore it into your userspace if you want, but I only deleted the redirect to the article that was deleted here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chakras - Number of Petals. You might want to write something from scratch. --Closedmouth (talk) 01:54, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Please do restore it to my userspace, and if I have notes from it just overwrite them. The vote says it was O.R., but even if it all is (which it probably is,) I think it has less O.R. than chakra and is more useful. I guess I should just take some notes; hopefully I will be able to write a cited article on it, but that will be a challenge--Dchmelik (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 Done: User:Dchmelik/petals --Closedmouth (talk) 05:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing BLPs

Hey, thanks for your help with the (holy smokes, Jimbo just peeked in at me! >_<) categorizing BLPs. Just a reminder to clear the section after you finish it, or clear the ones from a section you've done if you're not able to complete the whole thing. That way, we don't double up on the work. :) Thanks again! لennavecia 23:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Agh, did I forget to do that again? :( --Closedmouth (talk) 02:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Scott Beale is a vanity page?

Scott Beale is a published author. The forward to his book was written by Strauss & Howe, the million selling authors of The Fourth Turning. He is also the founder of an international service organization. His bio does NOT qualify as a vanity page.

If this is the crap you're going to pull as a new admin, I'm sure all Wiki users are in for a rare treat. I am reporting you to Wiki. Hopefully this sort of silly behavior wont continue in the future. 72.70.199.88 (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You know, you could have just removed the prod template if you disagreed with it. And I will happily restore it for you if you want me to. No need for insults. --Closedmouth (talk) 04:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Help me April 20, 2009

{{helpme}}

Please see the following Talk Page: Talk:List of black Academy Award winners and nominees. At the top of this page, there is a message box (the second one down) that states: "This article was nominated for deletion on July 19, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep." However, if you click on the link for "the discussion" ... you are directed to a blank page stating "this page does not exist". Does anyone know where the actual deletion discussion / debate disappeared to? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC))

Check the history, the page was moved. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Black Academy Award winners and nominees --Closedmouth (talk) 06:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC))

Deletion of Carlos Carrascosa

Hello Closedmouth, it looks like you have deleted the article on Carlos Carrascosa without citing a deletion discussion. Was this omission intentional? Regards, Skomorokh 14:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

There were so many reasons that article needed to be deleted, but it was mostly for its gross violation of WP:BLP --Closedmouth (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, perhaps my comment was not clear, but it looks as if you have unilaterally deleted this. There seems to be no AfD for this article, nor has it been raised at the BLP noticeboard or any such forum. Was there an expired PROD? If not, did you have a valid rationale for speedily deleting it? Sincerely, Skomorokh 14:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff#Summary_deletion_of_BLPs. If you think this is a poor action on my part, feel free to raise it with a third party. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I see, thanks; I wasn't aware of that ruling. You're clearly acting within community norms if the article meets the criteria. Would you mind userfying the article at User:Skomorokh/Carrascosa so that I may take a look at it? Some of the content might be salvagable. Thanks, Skomorokh 14:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd be uncomfortable restoring it publicly, it basically accuses this guy of murder, and there are very few sources to verify anything. Could I email the content to you? --Closedmouth (talk) 14:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Certainly; Special:Emailuser/Skomorokh. I promise I won't forward it or publish it anywhere without going through WP:ANI or WP:DRV first. Thanks very much for your time, Skomorokh 15:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Sent. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much, I appreciate your time. The topic certainly looks notable, with refs to the two main Argentine newspapers, but I can understand why you deleted it. Regards, Skomorokh 15:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes im trying to complete a page for one of my artists, and i really have no idea what im doing, how can i complete this page? I'm willing to pay someone for their time. I'm slowly learning how to navigate wikipedia, but as you can imagine it's quite confusing because i'm new.

best,niles

Nilest (talk) 07:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Ta

Thought no one was gonna do anything (Royal Flying Doctor vndl) - the number of edits at the one - yuk that picture of jimbo is freaky :( - I once drove him to a wikipedia event where i live - :) SatuSuro 15:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, no problem. Jimbo's standing right behind you. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
yaaaaaaaahhhhhh im loggin off now - worse than the b or was it c grade indonesian horror movies that they used to play on the overnight busess across java - SatuSuro 15:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

User Ronbreault deleted; Dolphin 24 sailboat deleted

On April 17, 2009 you began action that resulted in deleting me as a user, and deleting the article I created - Dolphin 24. This is about a classic sailboat, 300 produced between 1960 and 1977. 'Marionette alone' is a picture I took, of my boat, which is representitive of the class - this boat has been twice selected by Sparkman & Stephens to represent the Class - in 2001 and 2004. I am not engaged in any commercial activity, simply a volunteer trying to do a job on behalf of the 150 boats we have registered in the Rosters of our informal organization

There is a non commercial website, www.dolphin24.org, which is devoted to the history, technology and preservation of these boats. I am the webmaster. It explains our mission.

I did not check in to Wikipedia to see that this deletion action was in process until today. If possible, I would like to have you reverse this action.

Thank you

Ron Breault (Ronbreault (talk) 00:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)) ronbreault@cs.com

I have restored the article, for complicated reasons described in our deletion policy. I should point out that I didn't delete you as a user, just your page which redirected to the deleted article, thus resulting in a broken redirect, which we delete on sight. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - as you probably can tell I am not a frequent user and am not familiar with the protocols Ron Breault (Ronbreault (talk) 11:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC))

cooldown

Hi. Thanks for the comment on AIV. I didn't realise "cooldown" blocks were frowned upon. That wasn't exactly what I meant, I guess - more a block to get a chance to find out what his beef was and prevent vandalism in the meantime. I'm not complaining that the final decision was to indef block the chap in question (given his reaction, it looked to be the right decision), just suggesting that temporary blocks might sometimes be appropriate to get to the bottom of a complaint. GDallimore (Talk) 11:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey no problem, it's just that the term "cool/calm down block" is very controversial around these parts, so I was a little taken aback to see one being requested on AIV of all places ;) --Closedmouth (talk) 14:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Infinite block of user:GEERG??

Hi! I wonder why you have blocked GEERG, yes the account was used for promoting the organisation and yes it was in violating of COI, but the user have after my comment answered (by email) and said: "OK did not know that and asked me to delete the pages that he created". When I read the email Kimchi.sg had already deleted the pages, so I did nothing. We exchanged a few emails and I got a few links that shows that GEERG (the organisation) might be notable. I plan to see if I can get the article undeleted at some point when I have more time.

See the users last edit this does sound like a good faith user, that have been told that he behaved wrongly and understand, is this reason for indef blocking?? So I wonder why you blocked?? We do not block as punishment, only to prevent future problem. You blocked the 22 April! Re<script type="text/javascript" src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Omegatron/monobook.js/addlink.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>ad his last edit from 17 april, does it sound like he need to be prevented from creating future problems? If he does a few more bad edits then block him, but not now? As per WP:USERNAME "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on the circumstances may be seen as a problem." seams not to warrant indef blocking to me, it is his personal account, not that of the organisation! Also know that his first edit was a correction of a over 1 year old vandalism, give him some credit and dont BITE. --Stefan talk 13:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

If it is his personal account and not his company's, he's misrepresenting the aim of the account, and in the process blaring advertisements for the company in every edit he makes. The account is now softblocked (which it should have been in the first place; I need to tweak that script's settings), so he is free to create a new account minus the spam username. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
As of now he has 10 edits that is not on deleted articles, no edits since he have been warned, the account name is that of an organization. Per WP:USERNAME "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on the circumstances may be seen as a problem.", I can not understand why you block him. But nevermind, I have said what I want to said, if you stand by your block that is up to you, you have to live with it, I think you are BITEing a new and good faith user that made a few misstakes, my guess is that he will never come back after trying to log in to a soft blocked account, I think it is a loss for the community, he can contribute with things that is hard to come by. I will let this rest, but I think you should consider carefully if you think that it is correct to block a user after he have agreed that he have made bad edits, and seams to agree and understand the rules and have not doen anything wrong since then. You are blocking just because he have a username of a organisation, what are you trying to PREVENT? Missrepresentation, he is part of the organisation, if you do not like the link, remove it and say that it is not allowed? But block, is that not a bit hard? When did Missrepresentation become a blocking offense? Be carefull with those new buttons! Copying from WP:BLOCK, read it again, and think about!
Blocks are intended to reduce the likelihood of future problems, by either removing, or encouraging change in, a source of disruption. They are not intended for use in retaliation, as punishment, or where there is no current conduct issue which is of concern.

--Stefan talk 15:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Of Joey Stec

Hi, could you tell me why you deleted Joey Stec's wikipedia page? And tell me what kind of copyright infringement we had on the page so we can put it up again without having this happen again.

日本語ができる様なので日本語のお返事でも結構です。 Sickpuppymusic (talk) 18:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)sickpuppymusic

Sorry, it appears that was a mistake on my part. It's not often you stumble across a GFDL compliant artist bio. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Oops

Oops! I apologize for this - I must have clicked the wrong link in my watchlist, and didn't notice my mistake. henrik•talk 18:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I have done that myself too many times :) --Closedmouth (talk) 13:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Dominicans Don't Play

Can you reopen the dominicans don't play article so that I can add to it. There are many many additions that can be made to it. [[1]]
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01142008/news/regionalnews/schools_gang_scourge_128917.htm
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/080623newark.htm (government website)
http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs27/27506/dtos.htm (department of justice)
http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs27/27506/dtos.htm
http://gothamist.com/2008/07/14/williamsburg_gang_warefare_meets_yo.php
http://www.njgia.org/Communityarticles_archivesMonth.asp?oMonth=7 http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/0810/081001washington.htm
these are very reliable sources since your rationale was "16:23, 19 April 2009 Closedmouth (talk | contribs) deleted "Dominicans Don't Play" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: No reliable sources - most previous sources included only trivial mentions of the subject) " I would like to utilize a lot of the previous history of the subject.

CashRules (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done --Closedmouth (talk) 04:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I have placed in a lot of references. [2] CashRules (talk) 06:09, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of José Claussell

Can you please tell me how I can view the page after a speedy deletion has gone through before I had a chance to get to it? As I simply can't remember what was on the page to cause its deletion, and would like to have the chance to rewrite it properly. Couple of other Q's: (1) How come these deletions are handled so quickly before other users who may like to edit to make acceptable have a chance to? (2) As the website I used for the info, if I remember rightly, is in fact defunct anyway so surely that makes the copying of info straight over legit (it was one of my earlier attempts on wikipedia, I think :-) ? Any help greatfully rec'd, Jimthing (talk) 10:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, it seems you didn't copy the website straight away, I'll restore the article minus the copyright violation. --Closedmouth (talk) 10:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Fatomism

Hey, I set up a wiki for Fatomism yesterday, and yet you took it down, can I ask you why you did this? I was just trying to explain a under-appreciated religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AchillesTruth (talk • contribs)

Because I'm pretty sure you just made it up. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Your pretty sure I made it up? Exactly my point. You have no idea what it is, and therefore pawned it off as fake, which is what makes me so pissed off about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AchillesTruth (talk • contribs) 18:41, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Blatant violations

What do you mean by this?[3] Notice please that such a phrase, though not English-written, sounds extremely (and of course blatantly) offensive to many people: nobody of them (including me) would rationally be that kind... Policy says: "Usernames that are inappropriate in another language ... are still considered inappropriate." Thank you. --Erinaceus (talk) 09:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Not obvious because it's not English. This is the English Wikipedia. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Declined speedy

Hi. You declined a speedy saying "I'm not seeing it" [4]. I'm a little puzzled. Not seeing what? The copyright infringement? The opening is a straight copy of this site [5], the rest of the article is copied from a number of pages, including this[6] and this[7]. Yintaɳ  15:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC) (By the way, your Jimbo animation is giving me the creeps ;-)

Ah, I see it now. The link you gave had both the original text and the copied text buried within both articles. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it takes some (sod off, Jimbo!) figuring out, this one. It's a big (sod off, Jimbo!) cut-and-paste job, pieced together from various (sod off, Jimbo!) sites. Thanks. Yintaɳ  15:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC) (sod off, Jimbo!)
Guess what? He's got another one[8] Yintaɳ  16:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Naughty! *shoots* --Closedmouth (talk) 16:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
And it gets better all the time. Look at this[9]. I downloaded the thing, and yes, it's the same moneycontrol.com files again. Now in PDF format. Yintaɳ  16:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Ah, nice and simple, that one :) --Closedmouth (talk) 16:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

hats off

My hats off to you for this edit... I only wish more admins did that.---I'm Spartacus! NO! I'm Spartacus! 17:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Aw, shucks :) --Closedmouth (talk) 06:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Covenant Eyes

Article has been rewritten with several citations to reliable sources indicating notability. Please let me know if this is adequate on talk page.--Nowa (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about. A link would be handy. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
My apologies. Here is a link to the rewritten Covenant Eyes. Are the current references adequate to establish notability?--Nowa (talk) 10:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that looks fine. Good job. --Closedmouth (talk) 12:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I enjoyed rebuilding it. Would you feel comfortable removing the notability notice? I can't since I created the article.--Nowa (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Gclefdavis

Hi. I think something went wrong. These two are inconsistent with each other. Please also see Special:Contributions/67.193.114.50. Thanks.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AGclefdavis I think you're looking at his log of blocks, which would of course be empty. --Closedmouth (talk) 06:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I see my mistake now.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 13:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Spam issue

Hi I'm wondering if you please have a look at this [repeated spamming] of the Bone Thugs n Harmony article. The author(s) keep trying to add a forum link and some other magazine link. These changes have been reverted several times by different editors. I have done it myself twice but did not want to do it for a third time! Please let me know if contacting an adminstrator like yourself was the right course of action. Regards Hazir (talk) 05:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's bad enough to warrant admin action. You have every right to remove spam, but if it gets out of hand, ping me again. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Transparent materials merger

Sorry for the confusion! Please see the following discussion -- logger9 (talk) 18:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)