User talk:Cryptic/archive-3Text from www.wga.huI asked permission to www.wga.hu to use their text, so no copyright violations. I'm new here so sometimes I forgot to specify it. Thanks. Attilios
Hello Cryptic. What's the policy on use of material from www.wga.hu. I've noticed that numerous verbatim articles and images are being submitted from this site. They state their policy as follows:
Does Wikipedia have blanket approval for using this material? Also, www.wga.hu provides extensive references for their content, which they themselves may or may not have permission to use. See sources [[3]]. At the very least, shouldn't Wikipedia's use of this content be clearly acknowledged on article talk pages. --JJay 19:08, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your speedy response. I've reviewed the new pages submitted by Attilios so far this month. The following are all copyvios from www.wga.hu without any reference on the article talk pages:
There are probably many more if I look at edits from Attilios in October or earlier. Unless www.wga.hu has released their database under GFDL, I think we need to state clearly where we are getting our material (particularly as none of the articles have links or sources). Could you let me know how to proceed? I don't really want to tag all this as copyvios, but I will without a clear direction on policy. --JJay 01:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that some does not mean all. As per your instructions, I will write to Mr. Kren requesting permission for use of the 63 articles identified to date, while also pointing out that this is a partial list and that many more articles have/will be submitted, potentially encompassing all www.wga.hu content. I will reiterate that his acceptance must constitute a release compatible with GFDL. I will also request clarification regarding the images (the quality of the scans makes me feel that they may not be public domain, and www.wga.hu specifically states that they are not the legal owner). --JJay 18:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC) CongratulationsYou're an admin! Take a look at the free advice, if you're so moved, and keep up the good work. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:00, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Recreation of previously-deleted article...I noticed that you deleted Cherryrain earlier today after I speedy tagged it. Just a quick note to let you know that User:Cherryrain has re-created this page again, this time at CherryRain. This user has also made a personal attack against me on my talk page. As an admin, I wondered if you were aware of any specific policies for dealing with users who constantly recreate articles that have been deleted per AFD? By my reckoning, this is the third time that 'Cherryrain' or possible sockpuppets thereof have recreated this page - the original CrystalCherry article is now protected from recreation because of this. Thanks very much for your help. :) --Kurt Shaped Box 17:54, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm being harrassedcan you please end this. I do not want to be contacted by Kurt anymore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherryrain (talk • contribs) 19:36, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
The KinksSorry, but I will do it. I comletely realise that there is a copyvio in it, but I assure you that this is completely different article and the amount of copyvio is largely dismissive. The article passed through a period of change and I think that to delete the whole bunch of fan and people information is rash and utterly stipud. Nevertheless, I offer you to change the article back and start removing the problematic parts of it, where you consider that the copyvio is obvious. I mean - the article in Allmusic is much smaller than this and less detailed than this one. If you still consider it unappropriate, I will take my and other's guys work, will rewrite the reminiscent and problematic parts and will put it back. Actually, I will put it back either this or other way. It's better for me to work on it, while it's here. I mean I can put back the same article, but otherwise there will be no problematic or copyvio parts in it. But, it will be easy if you do not bitch about it and let me work more on it.
Copyvio resolutionsHi Cryptic, in regards to the The Kinks copyvio;
If he needs to be blocked and you're skittish (worried about conflict of interest or whatever) ask me or or ask at WP:AN--Duk 04:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
OkI'm continuing with redaction of any material you stripped down. The problematic parts as I speak are being rewritten. You are stubborn bastard and a nosey parker, and I hate you very much, because of that.
No worries
{{Unsigned2Tz}}You wrote (on the template's talk page): This can be merged into {{Unsigned2}} without breaking its current functionality using the shiny new template default parameter feature - just replace the {{{3}}} with {{{3|}}}. —Cryptic (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
yyrtThanks, I've restored it. It was just since it was blank, and it's title was yyrt, it looked like someone had just created an article with random letters and then left it blank. Thanks for brigning that to my attention. -- PRueda29 Ptalk29 01:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC) My sigThank you. No, it wasn't deliberate: I was trying to fix it in the wake of the Tidy HTML disaster, and looks like I mangled it in new and interesting ways. I didn't even realize there WAS a Calton page. It's (hopefully) fixed now, but I guess it means I have to track down and correct the Bad Sigs. --Calton | Talk 03:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC) Should we hold one error against two years of good contributions? I don't ask you to change your vote, but do you think that Halibutt is not fit for adminship *ever*? What if it he would be renominated in half a year, for example, and no other objection surfaced? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 06:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC) I see nothing wrong in advertising the vote. As Balcer pointed out on the RfA page, not many people watch this page and so I notified many users whom I thought would be interested, and I did not limit myself to 'friends' or 'Poles'. Besides, I have never asked people to vote 'support only', I have only told them that there is a vote, sometimes adding an additional note about certain comments that they may find interesting. I see nothing wrong with my note on the Polish admins page - our small Polish Wiki community should certainly benefit from seeing how things are properly done on international scale, and we may get some interesting information from Halibutt's activity on that wiki. Ii is not the only vote that got advertised (I get such adverts from time to time, and I see others users get them) and this particular vote has also been advertised by other users (including opponents). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works.
As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC) P.S. In case you consider this message a spam, just let me know and I shall remove it. Halibutt 05:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC) Hi Cryptic, My bad, apologies for that. I've fixed the closing side, not too sure what you meant about the copyvio (but deleted two revisions), let me know if there's anything more that needs fixing. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 17:50, 18 November 2005 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Research in irelandHi, Thanks for that. I'd assumed the few sentences remaining were fair use but I'll change them sometime tomorrow. Dlyons493 Talk 18:48, 18 November 2005 (UTC) ...is clearly a copyright violation, and one of the most blatant I've seen, so it should have been listed at WP:CP instead of WP:AFD. I've gone ahead and done so for this article. —Cryptic (talk) 16:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC) Thanks. ςפקιДИτς [[User_talk:SFGiants|<sup><span style="color:green">СФ</span><sup>]][[Special:Contributions/SFGiants|<sup><span style="color:lightblue">Гиганты</span><sup> My signature seems to be temporarily not working. Ignore it. :^|]] 02:10, 19 November 2005 (UTC) ThanksThanks for supporting me for adminship. The RfA passed today. I look forward to working with you to make Wikipedia a better place. --Nlu 05:41, 19 November 2005 (UTC) Crystalcherry has been recreated, I believe it lacks notability as per the previous AfD. I got involved in this when User:Cherryrain went "Opps", twice on Avril Lavigne and then requested my assistance after I reverted. I suspect this user has been biten/slighted by the AfD, and is not acting entirely in good faith. Cherryrain mentioned User:Drini's agreement for a rewrite; I'm not optimistic that will be sufficient to satisfy all users involved in this issue. (suggest replies/discussion should be directed to Talk:Crystalcherry) (CC'd to multiple users) - RoyBoy 800 05:59, 19 November 2005 (UTC) ThanksThanks for your redirect cleanup for the AfD batch I made Ian 13 11:17, 20 November 2005 (UTC) You recently deleted this page under CSD A3. It had been originally tagged as G1, then corrected to A1. I don't understand how content which mirrors the article title qualifies as vandalism. Could you please explain your rationale? --WAvegetarian 13:52, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Archival botIs the bot running as of yet, or should I manually archive the pumps for a little while longer? Steve block talk 09:52, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Modern Language mergeI've posted a response to your post on my talk page. Please review. Thank you! Thaagenson 16:17, 23 November 2005 (UTC) ExcellenceThat's total carelessness on my part; it won't happen again. Cheers. PJM 19:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC) Hello Cryptic, thanks for getting your bot to archive! Two quick questions/comments: first, when it updates the navbox, is it supposed to move the blue links to the left and add red links to uncreated archives, as was done previously before the 'bot started archiving? I really don't mind either way (having all blue links to archives or having both blue and red links to archives), but I thought I'd point this out. Second, just a friendly reminder to update the bot's page to describe the archiving activities. Thanks a lot for your help! Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Vargo ArticleHi. Are you sure that the re-created Joseph Vargo article was 'substantially identical' to the previous attempt? I didn't see the original copy, but I know Blooferlady sought advice on changes from the admin who first deleted it (User: Cleared as filed) before putting it back up. --CBD T C @ 02:13, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I've speedied this again. If you search through its whatlinkshere, you'll see that it's been used as the canonical example of a redlink continuously since 2001. (It was, coincidentally, removed from Wikipedia:How to edit a page yesterday, but only because that content's covered in Help:Editing now.) As its talk page states, better to just speedy the editing experiments that show up there; if it's protected deleted, it breaks the tutorials. —Cryptic (talk) 06:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
ANI archivalI just spotted Crypticbot running this. Way cool! Thanks for the work on this! Radiant_>|< 16:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC) Antwerp International School Article History Deletion.What i have been trying to do is to delete the article but it keeps getting reverted. i was the one that created the article and it had some slander towards some people in my school in it, there has been trouble due to this article and i want to take it off,, even though that the current article isnt bad i want to make sure that the whole history is deleted so that nobody else can read the past posts, mostly because it has been abused and bad things have been written on there. so what i am asking is if it is possible to take off the history of the Antwerp International School article. and perhaps even the whole section of the Article. so that nothing is left on there concerning the Antwerp International School. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.82.133.127 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Church of RealityYou have removed the Church of Reality discussion. I guess when the votes don't go in your favor you stop voting?--Marcperkel 18:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC) Moved from Cryptic's user page to here by --GraemeL (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
If it is a copyvio, you can still Speedy delete it under CSD:A8, since it was created only 5 hours ago. Owen× ☎ 04:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Relisting AfDsWhen you relist an afd for more discussion, please remove it from the older page; otherwise, someone else is likely to close it very quickly after you relist it. —Cryptic (talk) 04:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Peter HollasYou might be able to help with this. Something odd happened when I listed Peter Hollasfor deletion on 19 November 2005. The formatting magic wouldn't work on that day's AfD page, and failed to put in the header, so that the article sort of disappeared into the melee. Perhaps due to this it attracted no vites even though it's an obvious hoax. Should I relist it? Otherwise it looks as though nothing will ever happen. Flapdragon 15:51, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
And how would I do that? The instructions are (AFAIK) to add a line like {{subst:afd3 | pg=PageName}}; neither that nor inserting a new line like line above ({{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}}) worked, though it always has in the past. Try as I might I couldn't see how to edit the "source" that produces this effect. Many thanks for your help with this. Flapdragon 16:06, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 16:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC) I'm absolutely certain I didn't miss stage 2 (as the page history shows). The page created by that has been in my watchlist ever since. It's just when I got to stage 3 things went odd. Believe me, I tried hard to add the header manually but with no success. I've been through this procedure many times with no problem. So I think we must be at cross-purposes -- I'm still mystified as to what happened here. Never mind, it's sorted out now, so thanks again. Flapdragon 17:27, 30 November 2005 (UTC) A questionAs I am ever desirous of learning from my mistakes, and as you have expressed concerns over my AfD closures, I would like to ask your opinion of the following: The articles Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Aoki and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Quirk are slated to be closed. There are only two votes per AfD discussion, but both votes are, essentially, merge/redirect. I have merged the info at Don Aoki and Patrick Quirk (minus a lot of vanity blather in the latter case) into Keynote Systems as suggested by the AfD discussions. Is it kosher for me to now close out the two AfD discussions (assuming they're not already closed by someone else by the time you read this)? Or should I just mention in the discussions that I've merged the articles, and let someone else do the closing? → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 19:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC) RfA thanksI would like to thank you for your support of my recent successful RfA. If you have any further comments or feedback for me, my door's open - don't hesistate to drop a note on my talk page. Happy editing! Enochlau 11:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC) ReplyI have replied to your message on my talk page. Feel free to delete this message once you've read it. Gflores Talk 04:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC) Converting album infoboxes using your botI just wanted to stop by and say hi and also say thanks for scripting / programming (or whatever you clever people do) your bot to convert album infoboxes; it can be a very tedious task, and this is an enormous help! So: hello, and thank you so very much :) --Qirex 11:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC) Just curious...why you did this? My opinion is that archiving to subpages duplicates data, and disk space is cheap but not free, but I'm always happy to hear other opinions. - brenneman(t)(c) 23:35, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Maybe you know already, but you should know that this arbitration case was accepted, and one "diff" by you has been presented as evidence. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:52, 5 December 2005 (UTC) Lamestream marked for deletionWhat would be the best way to keep this word from being deleted? The bot your using has marked "lamestream" for deletion. —preceding unsigned comment by 216.37.39.103 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the diffs! — Matt Crypto 20:50, 6 December 2005 (UTC) Another questionI was wondering if you might perhaps take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Hirst. I feel that what I've done there was justified based on past closures of similar articles. Indeed, I closed another article similarly a week or two ago without anyone complaining. However, I can't find any guideline pages which discuss when an article might be justifiably userfied, so I feel that I may be exceeding my authority. Any thoughts you may have on the matter would be appreciated. → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 15:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, Cryptic, for your laconic support in my RfA - I'll do my best as an admin to make the reality of Wikipedia rise to the level of the dream. BD2412 T 02:13, 8 December 2005 (UTC) <--note new "admin gold" sig :-D Village Pump archivingHi Cryptic, I was directed to you as being the guy who runs the bot that archives the village pumps. I was wondering if you could take a look at Wikipedia_talk:Village_pump_(policy)#Save_the_archives.21 and add your thoughts on the feasibility/value of this proposal. Thanks a lot. Christopher Parham (talk) 07:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC) Thank youThank you so much for fixing up Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit/members (shown on Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit) I was just wondering if it was possible to make the a at the start appear like the rest of the letters for sections. --Adam1213 Talk + 08:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Your vote on my RFAMy RFA vote draws to a close here in just a couple of hours. I am hoping you will permit me the opportunity to possibly sway your vote in a different direction, if not to "Support", then at least to "Neutral". I believe that you are concerned with my lack of experience because said lack of experience will lead to mistakes and possible errors in judgement. Assuming this belief is true, I feel it cogent to point out that I will inevitably make mistakes whether my RFA succeeds today, or whether another two months go by before it succeeds, or whether a year goes by before it succeeds. This is partly because I am human, and thus fallible, and partly due to the fact that passing an RFA confers upon someone a whole new suite of tasks and responsibilities. And while discussing the theory of these tasks and responsibilities prior to being granted them will ameliorate some of those mistakes, they will not eliminate them. Indeed, I have seen mistakes made by Admins where AfD discussions have been closed as "delete" but the pages haven't actually been deleted, or where AfD discussions have been relisted but haven't been removed from the old AfD page, or some other, similar error. What I would like to suggest to you is that the important question is not "Will Extreme Unction make mistakes if granted Admin access?" but rather "How will Extreme Unction deal with the mistakes he will inevitably make if granted Admin access?" And that the answer to this latter question is "Maturely, and gracefully." The following links are my responses to having various mistakes pointed out to me. I believe that they demonstrate a consistent pattern of level-headed responses to being notified of a mistake. [4] I concede that a "no consensus" close made by me was made in error, and alter my closure comments. In addition to these instances, there have also been the interactions between you and I, where I have also (hopefully) displayed a clear, level head when responding to your comments. The long and short of it is: I am not generally given over to having my ego involved when I make a mistake. I don't petulantly stamp my feet and deny that I've made an error to salve my bruised vanity, and I don't dig in my feet and refuse to make the correction. Errors and mistakes are inevitable. People screw up. The proper way to deal with that is to accept it, correct any errors you've made, and move on. And that's what I do. Which has the advantage that I learn from my mistakes a lot faster than people who refuse to admit error. My apologies for the length of this message, but I wanted to make a good case on the first go. I hope that you will find these comments compelling. If not, I understand and respect your decision. Thanks for your time. My RFA was successful, and squeaked by with a final tally of 46/13/2. I would like to express my appreciation for your participation in my RFA, even though you voted oppose. I consider your stated reasons for opposing the vote to be thoughtful and well-spoken. My goal now is to conduct myself in such a manner that you will never regret the success of my RFA. → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 11:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC) DeletionThanks for the reminders regarding deletion! Enochlau 21:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC) Re: sighelpthank you! Plough | talk to me 07:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC) Some questions about deleting a redirectOn November 21, I put the following in Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion: Dan Green comic → Dan Green (artist) — New article created with a name inconsistent with Wikipedia naming conventions. Moved new article to Dan Green (artist). Only two edits to the page are the initial page creation and my subsequent move of the page. → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 14:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC) There it has languished lo these past few weeks. I would like to delete this redirect myself now that I have the ability, but I'm not sure if policy permits me to do so. And, more generally, RFD is one of the places I planned on helping with if I became an admin, so it would be good to know what the procedures are. 1) Is it considered kosher to delete redirects which have names in considerable variance with standard wikipedia naming schemes, assuming they have trivial edit histories? 2) More generally, what is the proper procedure for RFD? I see a lot of backlog on that page, and some seem to draw votes while others do not. Is the standard procedure to simply keep the ones that don't draw any votes? Or is it up to the individual discretion of whichever admin feels like clearing out the backlog? 3) Any special procedures I should be aware of, over and above what is mentioned on the RFD page itself? Thanks for your time.
Okay, after ruminating on, then sleeping on, then further ruminating on the above, I have a question: How does one tell if a redirect has a history that's been merged into the target article?
My removal of comments by Nandesuka from the webcomics workshopI'm not surprised that you're a little puzzled by my removals. The workshop only exists for one purpose: to enable editors to make the arbitrators' job easier by performing some of the clerical work involved. The first section I removed reads, in full:
Nandesuka's comments are just sniping at me, or trolling, and belong, if anywhere, on my user talk page. I also engaged in some sniping which I have also removed, for the same reason: it clutters up the workshop page without illuminating the principle under discussion, which was taken from the arbitration committee's own precedents and reads as follows:
It's quite unexceptionable and was summarised by me in the following comment:
The second removal was unfortunate:
In removing yet more sniping by Nandesuka--including in this case a quite serious presumption of bad faith--I also removed a useful comment by SCZenz. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC) How does 2 delete, 0 keep result in "no consensus"? —Cryptic (talk) 03:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Another request (Needs infobox conversion)You've done a fantastic job on converting the infoboxes listed Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Needs infobox conversion. However, a user has pointed out that there are quite a few more that need to be changed, about 2000. See here. When you have time, there are a bunch that need to be converted. Alternatively if that's too time-consuming, you can hand down the human-assisted bot to one of us in the Wikiproject to work on this task. Whatever you please. If you don't feel up to it, don't worry about it, we'll take care of it. :) Gflores Talk 16:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Image galleriesYou recently commented at Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Proposal_to_modify_WP:NOT_an_image_gallery. In a related development, another, in my mind, valuable Image gallery is up for deletion (AfD). Please comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 15:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC) DRVThe reason I think they're making a political point is User:David Gerard#Undeletion. Allowing a list of names to appear on DRV will only allow fighting over it. -Splashtalk 15:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC) PROPHIXI have worked dilligently with wavegetarian to fix the problems with the PROPHIX article, we now believe it is suitable for Wikipedia. Please review it and let me know whether your deem it appropriate for Wikipedia. PROPHIX Wiki —preceding unsigned comment by Jpuopolo (talk • contribs) 18:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I have not, I am unsure how to do so as I am new to Wikipedia, could you please advise how the deletion notice can be removed and who are the other individuals that need to be contacted? Regards
My vandal LOLThanks for the block. I love seeing my name in summary lines...usually not good, but hey that was an exception. :) Thanks. So..........as another newly minted admin, how would I have gone about that (removal of the address verion of the file)? If its on the guide to deletion and I just don't remember, just point me there. :) --Syrthiss 20:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. That orphaned afd of mine for J. Erick Sinkhorn was either clobbered by a later edit or someone removed it. I even had the log on watch to try and avoid that. --Syrthiss 16:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
deeceevoice arbitrationAs a party to her RfC, you might be interested to know a request for arbitration has been filed towards deeceevoice Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Deeceevoice. -Justforasecond 18:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC) xd and Category:Pages for deletionsorry about that. thanks for making the template changes, will note on the rest of xd + discussion and won't happen again. ∴ here…♠ 19:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC) Optimizing spoiler.jsI've written what I believe to be a somewhat more efficient version of your spoiler.js script for my monobook.js (starting from the line
Guillemots: Deleted page? Why?Ok, I did recreate the "Guillemots (band)" article because I DID NOT agree with the arguments those guys made to delete an article... I mean... Non notable? Doesn't meet the Wikipedia Music criteria?! Just because the band isn't yet that famous this should be an argument to not make mention of them in Wikipedia? Well... Let's see... Everyone keep saying they are going to be huge in 2006... We need to wait them to be REALLY famous? Some guys are selling Guillemots albums on eBay for more than US$20 (when it costs less then US$3) because those albums were sold out, they are limited. Last week one of their songs reached the 4th. place on NME Charts. On UK Charts They got 74th. place... What are we waiting for? Do they really need to be number one to get an article on this encyclopedia? What can I do about it? Could you guys reconsider your vote? Thanks! —preceding unsigned comment by Stefanobw (talk • contribs) 02:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Oops
Sorry for creating so much work for you. I'm sure there's a reason, but I'll try to stay more focused next time. I hope I've redeemed myself by histo-merging a couple of cut-n-paste moves you posted October 25. — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 21:27, Dec. 18, 2005
Moving articles on AfdD'oh, sorry, I was hoping that wouldn't have been a problem. I tried creating the redirect first, but for some reason it kept showing up on my screen as a red link, as if it wouldn't save. So I tried something else. Guess I lost patience. CanadianCaesar 21:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC) Cryptic bot for AfD and CSD talk pagesHi, Cryptic. I saw that Cryptic bot automatically archived the old discussions on the Village Pump. I was wondering if it could do the same on the talk pages of Articles for Deletion and Criteria for Speedy Deletion, which also get a lot of posts (especially AfD). Perhaps the lag time should be increased to 10 or 14 days, though. What do you think? Thanks, Kjkolb 13:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Request for access to revise a deleted pageGreetings. I was redirected to your page by the Wikipedia:Deletion review after discussing the issue with a sysop. I would like to get access to the article OGTV2 - From Tha Hood to Hollywood, that have been deleted a month ago, because i found a new reference link as a result of using Hotbot web search (i guess this link wasn't included last time, but i am not sure, and i would like to check the archives). This article is about a Snoop Dogg album, that is co-produced by west coast fellow rapper Daddy V.The new cited page would be the westcoast2k's news of October, 2004. This internet site mentioned on the West Coast hip hop Wikipage as one of the trustable West Coast information sources. Please answer me. Thank you. Lajbi 15:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
The MovementWhat do you think of the movement? Reply here. Thanks. --Kin Khan 03:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC) This has be re-created twice today. Please discuss your objection to it with the re-creator. Uncle G 03:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Saw III AfDSorry about that; I knew I was forgetting something. --King of All the Franks 16:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Re:Moving articles on afdWhen you move an article that's on afd, could you please create a redirect from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OldTitle to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewTitle instead of moving the afd discussion? My bot can account for redirected afd discussions automatically, but it can't detect moved ones, and there isn't really an easy way to make it do so. —Cryptic (talk) 15:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
AFDI just wanted to let you know I got your message. I am planning on finishing these deletion, hopefullly within a week. I have been going through articles looking for bad links to Wikisource, which in many cases cause editors to repeatedly add works to the completely wrong place. I have followed links to prompt that a page did not exist on Wikisource with 18 deleted edits. As I was going through my search I found these many blank pages and thought would be remiss not to tag them, but I could hardly complete the nomination then and make any headway through my list. They have sat ignored and blank since July and so I thought little harm to let them sit a bit longer till I finish my primary project. If you believe I would do better not to tag further articles as go through my list I will refrain from doing so. I truly more concerned about Wikisource issues, but felt bad looking at all the blank pages and doing nothing--BirgitteSB 17:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and sorry for disturbing you with my problemIs there a possibility to report users who oppose the undeletion decision (made earlier the same day), and re-deleted the page and added 15 more because it is against their beliefs? Please help! It is urgent. The guy is getting worse. Lajbi 17:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!!Well, slap me on the chin and call me Charlie.I didn't even see that. I'll undelete and relist. Ral315 (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2005 (UTC) Thanks for fixing that AfD...I followed the template, and when I got the old discussion, I got sort of stuck, as there's nothing listed on what to do about that besides placing the new material on the discussion page. MSJapan 18:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC) |