User talk:Kevin/Archive 4

Not sure what you are on about

A new name appeared under child sex offenders and I put a citation tag on it that means if within a reasonable time it it does not have a citation it may be removed. Have a close look at the page history I have provided reliable citations for 95% of the people listed on that page. The name in question was put there by another contributor not me so if you could not find a valid citation you are within your rights to remove it but I do not need to be involved unless you are interested in working on the article with me to improve it regards Matt (talk) 12:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not working against you at all. Sorry if I misread the history on that entry. Regardless, the WP:BLP policy is very clear - Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. When I have time i usually search for a reference before removal, but in this case I didn't have time. Cheers Kevin (talk) 21:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is great because I was not aware I do not have to wait for discussion to remove a name that is obviously fictional or spurious and have been using citation and reasonable time. regards Matt (talk) 01:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aryan Invasion of Europe

G'day Kevin. This article is patent nonsense, so I'm going to put the deletion tag back. See my edits at the bottom of the article. Cheers--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. From WP:CSD#G1 - Patent nonsense and gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content. This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases.. This article clearly does not fit this criteria. Kevin (talk) 03:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

kevin, I just wanted to thank you for your participation in my recent RFA. as such, I've left some templated thank-spam for you below, in addition to this thoughtful hand-typed message. ;> feel free to check out my in-depth RFA analysis where I'm seeking community input on the issues identified. best regards, xenocidic (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Review

I've put up a list of sample questions, including the ones you suggested, on the talk page of the RfA review. If you'd like to take a look at them and let me know if you're happy I'll start the process of advertising for responses. Many thanks, Gazimoff WriteRead 16:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


delan (juggernaut0102) rfa

Hi kevin, i got your message about not being transcluded properly, how can i fix that? I don't know what you mean. Please help (reply to me on my talk page) Juggernaut0102[User_talk:Juggernaut0102|(talk)]] 09:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered on your talk page, but the essence is that User:Fritzpoll has fixed it for you. Kevin (talk) 09:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you thank you thank you!!. I'll consider waiting a long time while I get my skills and edits up to scratch before i get a new rfa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juggernaut0102 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kosha

Thankyou once again for putting me right. The page was plural-titled and I could not fix that because there was a redirect page and I cannot delete pages. There is now a page floating around called Kosha-redirect-obsolete. So I messed this up in an attempt to follow naming conventions. Please refer me to any useful page - also where I can find a general list of tags, requests for any occasion, if such there be. Thanks, O guardian angel. Redheylin (talk) 00:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves is the page you want for this situation. Kevin (talk) 00:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Gardner

I put the link to that AfD in question back, and converted to appear as external link per WP:SELF. That sentence requires a citation and thus the self-reference is necessary. SYSS Mouse (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the need for the AFD link myself, as the MSNBC ref supports the sentence in it's entirety. The sentence states that The students then found an entry about "Caspian James Chrichton Stuart IV" on the online encyclopedia..., and ...were able to derive from the deletion discussion Gardner's real name; neither statement is supported by a link to the AFD in question. There is a link to the AFD in the external links section that is adequate for those who are interested, but I see no value in the inline link. Kevin (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. Missed that. But your format is wrong that there is a special convention when dealing with self-reference. SYSS Mouse (talk) 21:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean the last external link? I think that's been there all along. Kevin (talk) 22:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the feedback on the Carl Freer page. Much appreciated. Renee (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it helps. Kevin (talk) 12:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capone-E

I was just goin through the capone-e page and there is a lot of vandalism on it. i tried fixing one, then noticed another and then another. Last time i was on the page was alright, but i haven't been on in maybe a month or two and it's bad on there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicanoJ (talk • contribs) 20:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I find vandalism over a long period of time by various editors I generally revert back quite a way as well. I think you did the right thing here. Kevin (talk) 06:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i was a little confused

I got it wrong the time you removed it (thank you, i didnt want to remove it[too lazy]) and the second time i just did it right. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GENIUS(4th power) (talk • contribs) 22:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA

Best of luck for your RFA -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Kevin (talk) 09:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:The Incredible Hulk (soundtrack)

Done. --SkyWalker (talk) 10:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Hopefully it can be resolved easily. Kevin (talk) 10:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I don't know why the article should be merged. I created lots of films and games soundtracks articles and this is the first one iam having problems with. --SkyWalker (talk) 10:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Generally I feel that articles should be merged if they are not notable of themselves, but are a useful part of a larger topic. In this case, there is some independent news coverage of the soundtrack that is probably sufficient to show that it is notable. Kevin (talk) 10:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Joseph Didier

Just a heads up, but you may want to check google archives a little more carefully. Two Joseph Didiers were murdered in the 1970s. The teen from Rockford, Illinois that was murdered by Robert Lower is the one this AfD is about, but all of the hits from Denver are in regards to a 26 year old man (also named Joseph Didier) who was murdered by Marvin Gray in Colorado. AniMate 18:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats to our newest administrator!

Just dropping you a line to let you know that I just closed your RfA as successful. Congratulations!

As a new administrator, you might find Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and Wikipedia:New admin school of interest. If you have any specific questions, feel free to ask me directly; I'll be happy to answer, and so will any of the other editors that watch my talk page.

Congrats again! EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Kevin (talk) 04:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats, Kevin, good luck with the tools. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 06:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats. Feel free to utilize my admin dashboard at User:Xenocidic/dashboard. You may transclude it with {{User:Xenocidic/dashboard}}, or copy the code if you wish to make changes. xenocidic (talk) 13:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all. Kevin (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your dashboard works very well. Kevin (talk) 03:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

I'm thanking everyone here, rather than sending out lots of thank spam.

Thanks to everyone who commented in my RFA. I'll be sure to try and not let the community down. Feel free to let me know if you want help, or if you see me straying from the path. Thanks again. Kevin (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, Kevin. You might want to finish off what you started at WP:RREV now :) Best of luck! Gazimoff WriteRead 13:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will. I waited in case my experience changed my views. Kevin (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh congrats

I had no idea you were an admin. :)--SkyWalker (talk) 11:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Kevin (talk) 11:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your help please...

I see you deleted Abdul Wahid (Pakistan). I have worked on the articles of other guys named Abdul Wahid. I take it this article was recently created? Had someone else placed a speedy deletion tag on it? Had someone else {{prod}}ded it?

I'd like to check to see if there is material in this article that should be merged to one of the articles about one of the other guys name Abdul Wahid. Can you userify it for me at User:Geo Swan/Review/Abdul Wahid (Pakistan)?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was not much to it - Abdul Wahid [Urdu : عبدالواحد](born December 3rd, 1974) is a Pakistani. is the whole content at the time the speedy tag was placed. The next revisions added some personal and contact info which are unlikely to be relevant. Cheers Kevin (talk) 23:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, no indication that he might have been one of the other guys named Abdul Wahed? Okay, thanks for checking for me!
And, just because I think an argument can be made that the existing deletion log provides an insufficient record to serve as a reliable audit trail, can I ask again whether the deletion was a result of your completing a process started with a {{prod}} or speedy deletion tag?
Last fall an administrator sat down and deleted eight articles I had started. They weren't new articles. And they didn't leave any kind of notice on my talk page that they deleted them. I noticed that three of them had been deleted three or four months later, when I saw three redlinks in a list that didn't have any redlinks previously. I contacted this administrator. They were unresponsive. I asked for userification on DRV. Most respondents assumed, since this administrator had used CSD codes as their justification for the deletions. Some of them were quite impatient with me, for rocking the boat.
But, when the articles were userified, I found what I had been afraid of. This administrator appeared to have simply deleted articles he didn't like. Most people who looked at the articles thought that the CSD tags he put in the deletion log were inappropriate. Although some warned me they thought the current state of the articles were weak, and that they might not survive a full {{afd}}. I have restore some, but not all of these articles to the main article space.
There were two things about this experience that left a big impression on me.
  1. The existing deletion log is simply insufficient for serving as a reliable edit trail. Currently administrators indicate the deletion was the completion of an {{afd}}. Or they generally apply a CSD code. There is no way for a reader to look at a log entry, and know whether the an administrator was completing a process initiated by someone else, so that at least two sets of eyes looked at it, or whether they deleted it solely on their own individual judgment.
  2. I have read the Administrator's guide to deletion. Unless I am reading the document incorrectly, it seems to me that it recommends administrators reserve the use of unilateral deletion for true emergencies. Unless I am reading the document incorrectly, it seems to me that it recommends administrators take off their administrator hat, and simply apply the same {{prod}} and {{db}} tags to articles that concern them, when those articles do not represent emergencies.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 18:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doing the AfD journey

Hello! I am sorry to contradict you, but I disagreed with your turning down two articles I submitted for speedy deletion (Big booty and Evidence of Inequity), as well as your rejecting a third article that someone else nominated (Dandavidband). As per your comments attached to your edits, I put the articles up on AfD for community consensus. Also as an FYI -- I added a COI tag to Dandavidband, as the band itself created the article. If your time allows, I hope you can weigh in on these AfD discussions. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Congratulations on becoming an admin! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the congrats. The WP:CSD criteria are quite stringent in what is and is not a speedy candidate. Big booty was tagged A1 (patent nonsense), which is for unsalvageably incoherent material. While the article may not be notable, it is coherent. Evidence of Inequity is an album, which is specifically ineligible for A7. I declined Dandavidband because the statement: Over 15 interviews and reviews on the press is a clear assertion of notability, whether truthful or not. I hope this is helpful. Cheers Kevin (talk) 08:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again! On Dandavidband, I may suggest trying to do a Google search for the interviews with the Toronto Exclusive, the Liberal, the Economist and the rest of the "15 interviews" -- nothing comes up online. The lack of referenced sources in the article was a major clue to me that something was incorrect, along with the obvious fact that the band itself created the article. Your points on the other two speedy delete nominees were well taken, and I appreciate the insight on the limitations of the CSD criteria -- if I should see future articles along those lines, I will speed them directly to AfD. Be well and thank you for your fine work here. Ecoleetage (talk) 11:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know that Dandavidband doesn't come up in a search, but for speedy deletion what needs to be missing is the assertion of notablity in the article itself. I'll ignore an assertion if it is clearly false, but the one in this article is plausible, so AFD is more appropriate. The thing about CSD is that one person nominates and another deletes. If they both agree, then the chance of the decision being wrong is minimal. Kevin (talk) 11:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This may be amusing, but just now I wound up passing your wisdom along to a newbie editor who was more overzealous than I was in getting things erased: [1]. Thus, you can be assured that your comments were absorbed and are being shared! Be well and thanks again for your wise input. Ecoleetage (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Dandavidband was just speedy deleted in AfD. :) Ecoleetage (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know - I must be more pedantic than some ;). Kevin (talk) 12:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you can't win them all. I've enjoyed conversing with you, so I hope you can accept this as a token of my appreciation:

The Barnstar of Good Humour
For making the daily Wikipedia experience a pleasant and enjoyable environment. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


FWIW, Kevin, I think you've doing it exactly right. The speedy close on Davidandband at AfD was a little wrong. If it was a clear hoax, the admin who did it should have closed it as snow, not speedy, but its not worth arguing the point. I commented at the afd for Big booty, which is how I got here. DGG (talk) 12:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DGG. I actually tend to watch how you deal with deletions to know what to do. Kevin (talk) 12:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Slow down an smell the roses

Please wait an hour before deleting a new entry. it is polite to at least inquire as to what is going on. Sherman Block is a significant character in Los Angles history. Saltysailor (talk) 12:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. It's easy to see now, but what I deleted was missing the bit that showed he was not just another Sheriff. Kevin (talk) 23:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting new page

Dear Kevin, Today you have deleted one of the entry titled "Technopreneur Pre-Seed Fund Programme" (G11: Blatant advertising) - May I ask why you said that? Do you know that there are lot of people look information for this programme in Malaysia? Paul (talk) 11:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to base my decisions to delete on the information in the article, not on information I don't have (the bit about people in Malaysia looking for info). The way the article was written seemed more like advertising than encyclopedic material. If the fact that lots in Malaysia use this service has been reliably published then that type of reference could be used to rewrite the article. Let me know if you want me to provide you the article contents. Kevin (talk) 12:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
thanks kevin for the reply. Here are some information about this fund -

There are actually lots of people interested in this fund. There are quite a few startups who got this fund too. I was hoping this information will help those Malaysians who might google for it and find the info from a right place.

It would be great to get the contents. But it would also be better if you can help me rewrite it if it is possible for you. Perhaps the way I wrote sounds commercial and you can write it better? Thanks a lot Kevin. Paul (talk) 13:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at this if I find some time. Are there any other news sources than the star-techcentral reference? Kevin (talk) 04:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I need to look for it. I remember seeing it in some Bahasa malay newspapers. Perhaps I will just give a call to the reporter who wrote it and ask for some other english newspaper sources. Will keep you posted. Thanks Paul (talk) 07:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diesel Bombers

Hello Why was Diesel Bombers Page Deleted , heres a Page with less info on it TDR DieselMinded (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted because the website does not meet the notability criteria of WP:WEB. You would need to show newspaper of magazine articles written about the site to show that it is notable. Kevin (talk) 01:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for upgrading me to Rollbacker. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 03:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Kevin (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Are you saying that even if notable information is forthcoming it's okay to threaten to block someone?

Isn't a better way to try to work cooperatively? I am a nice person who doesn't get mad. But one of the others seems to be hostile. I wish they would just try to be helpful in trying to write stuff rather than follow me around and threaten. Presumptive (talk) 04:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, what I am saying is that if your actions could lead you to being blocked, which is possible if you recreate deleted material, then warning you is better than not warning you. Often what people write sounds a lot worse on reading it than the author intended. Kevin (talk) 04:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Beatles' characters

Thanks for closing this one off. I wrote my closure for it, damned if I know what happened. I probably just previewed it, didn't hit save, and then closed the tab without realising. Oops! --Stormie (talk) 06:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of my "moved" pages

Hey, I noticed you went back and cleaned up the mess I left when I "moved" Lee Young You. Another editor pointed out my mistakes (I got myself mixed up and was following the instructions for a merge, not a move), but there are a few other pages I did the "cut and paste" way too. If I give you the titles, do you mind doing whatever needs to be done to make things "right" again? I'm really sorry and would appreciate it a lot. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, leave the list here if you like. Kevin (talk) 22:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks -- you're awesome!
All done. Kevin (talk) 23:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I really appreciate it! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A very diplomatic request

Kevin,

I'm posting anonymously for a reason. I have noticed a (weak) pattern in some postings that imply someone might have found a very good way to vote using other people's IDs.

Question: Did you vote on the AfD for "List of White South Africans"? If you did not, we have a problem.

A simple yes or no posted Here, is all I need.

Thank you,

24.10.111.154 (talk) 04:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I created the AfD. Someone else added Delete in front of my nomination statement, which I removed. There is nothing sinister here that I can see. The history shows what is going on. Kevin (talk) 04:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

astrovan124

This image was moved to commons, but I don't know where in commons or how to make it show up in a Wikipedia article. Please advise.--Utahredrock (talk) 05:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC) The Commons image is Image:STS-124 Astrovan portrait.jpg. I have a few more to go and then I'll fix the image links in STS-124. Kevin (talk) 05:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

Took your advice and moved it to dispute resolution, can anyone close a topic on AN/I? Justin talk 14:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need really. Once the discussion has stopped, the thread is automatically archived. Kevin (talk) 22:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The only reason for the query is that when I posted the comment to that effect, the IP editor is continuing to report my every move there. Justin talk 22:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I am really beginning to hate this place because of a coward like Grawp. Neverteless, thank you SO much for the protection increase. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PMDrive1061 (talk) 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 their talk page with a friendly message.

Admins should take action

Admins should act. If they cannot act, they should not be admins. It was a clear repeat performance of the consistent course of vandalism. If admins cannot act, they should not be admins. -- Elaich talk 06:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Troyrodriguez361

Troyrodriguez361 (talk · contribs) is requesting an unblock. -- Ned Scott 10:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've given the benefit of the doubt, and unblocked. Kevin (talk) 11:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to deleted pages

I noted that you deleted Central Asian Battalion but left the redirect pages that linked to it. What is the proceedure for removing the redirect pages and is there any way a regular user, such as my self would be able to delete such pages? Is there a separate tag to be used for such redirect pages? Dbiel (Talk) 02:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The usual procedure is for the deleting admin to check for this. Thanks for the heads up. To tag them for speedy deletion, add {{db-r1}} to the page. Cheers Kevin (talk) 02:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply Dbiel (Talk) 02:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Please go one step further and completely protect both pages. I quit. I don't know who this Grawp asshole has somehow concluded that I'm a banned user from several years ago, but I want no more part of this site. That was the last straw. What I promise to do is to contact law enforcement; I take garbage like that very seriously. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have authorization from BCC Research to use and distribute their literature and logo. Market Research.com is a reseller and is therefore subject to BCC's Copyright. Please Restore the BCC Research Article, but add a COI tag. Thanks Stuart.foster@bccresearch.com Stuartfost (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart, Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission has information on how you need to go about officially noting BCC's permission to use their material. Note that BCC need to do more than just give permission, they need to release their material under a free license such as GFDL. It would likely be easier to rewrite the article in your own words. Until BCC have freely licensed the material, I will not be able to restore the article. Kevin (talk) 00:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, I wrote the copy that Market Research.com has on their site. They were supplied said copy by me. I can call them and have them say "Kevin rocks" within that copy if I so chose. I updated the copy on the BCC Article to better reflect a neutral point of view. Poke around http://www.bccresearch.com/about.php for confirmation of this. Stuartfost (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then you could have them write BCC Research releases all content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation license, which would cover it. Kevin (talk) 02:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Review

Hello Kevin. I've noticed that you have a completed set of responses to the RfA Review question phase at User:Kevin/RFA review , but they don't seem to be included on the list of responses here. If you've completed your responses, please can you head to Wikipedia:RfA Review/Question/Responses and add a link to them at the bottom of the list so that they get included in the research. We have a closing date of midnight UTC on 1st July, so please add your link before this date. Once again, thank you for taking the time to participate in the Question Phase of RfA Review.Gazimoff WriteRead 14:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm I can see them there, below Wizardman. 23:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tohru Honda with Kyo Sohma (cat form), episode 26.jpg

Hi, can you undelete Image:Tohru Honda with Kyo Sohma (cat form), episode 26.jpg. I CSDed it thinking it wasn't being used anymore, but turns out it was removed by a vandal and the primary editors of the article would like this one back. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I'll remove the tags as well. Kevin (talk) 23:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you...is it possible to partially delete the history of an article? I worked on the article Meerkat Manor: The Story Begins in my user space for awhile before launching it today. I launched it by moving, forgetting the history would go with it, so now it has all of that user WIP page with it. I need to remove all of the stuff from before the 19:58, May 25, 2008 edit. Is that something an admin can do, or will I need to move the article back then recreate it as a fresh article? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted all the earlier edits. That's the only way to remove them. Kevin (talk) 03:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Its much appreciated :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image

Thats what I did and it kept loading the old one back on. Thats why I did the second page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my mind.

I'm back.  :) Now that my pages are semi-protected, the little twerp can lash out at me all he wants. Thanks for the support. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's good to hear. Kevin (talk) 08:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PUI

OK, I did it. Thanks for noting!--OsamaK 07:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

kama

Kevin, you kindly offered to lend a hand with redirects - well, I ran into a minefield with kama. This currently has at least four pages devoted to the same idea - it is a Hindi word for desire. That's apart from the "kamasutra" article. What's happened is; Kama is a personified godling in Hinduism, exactly like Eros - a personified or deified concept. There were also two "Theosophical" articles - not mentioned on the disambiguation. I boiled those down to one at kamarupa, leaving a redirect at kama (Theosophy) and I renamed the page "Indian and Theosophical", since the Theosophical is just the Indian. With me? So now there are three - two for the concept and one for the personification, and these altogether would make one good article, but the two top articles at kama are both heavily linked to, and amalgamating them will cause massive redirects. But it makes sense to unify. Help?? Redheylin (talk) 03:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look. Not sure how much use I will be though, as I know very little of the subject. Kevin (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I reported my cut-and-paste, since I still do not have the hang of how to do it right, and now I will post tags on the pages to propose that kama=eros gets merged with Kama=Eros and kama=eros (according to someone else) and try to work out how to do it by the book. All this spirituality is a right mess, because several sects have written about the same idea according to themselves on separate pages. This means they are all based on primary sources, NPOV and without any means of getting a critical handle on the little differences that exist from sect to sect. Redheylin (talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Park tunnels floor plans

Apparently my image was a blatant violation of copyright law?

I custom-made the image using a background from Google Earth with an image I created by sketching the blueprints from the engineering works and double-negative-colouring it using Photoshop and Fireworks.

Please explain how that is a blatant violation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel of music (talk • contribs) 10:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google Earth hold the copyright to all images shown in their software. That means you cannot make derivative images either. Kevin (talk) 10:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]