User talk:PhilKnight/Archive27

Alertle

Alertle is not "a person or a group of people". It is a web application competing against Google Reader which has been referenced by several notable sources:

What is your criteria for deleting the page here ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkansaws (talk • contribs) 01:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding AC

re [1], why not just delete it? PouponOnToast (talk) 18:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PouponOnToast, I had started to write a note on your talk page, but clearly you are much quicker typer than me. The deletion log reads as follows:
  • 22:07, 9 February 2008 UninvitedCompany (Talk | contribs | block) restored "Wikipedia:Requests for comment/******" ‎ (562 revisions restored: Our convention is we courtesy blank, not delete)
and I didn't want to do anything that could be perceived as starting a wheel war. If you want to reapply the speedy tag, then go ahead, I don't mind. Alternatively, I would suggest WP:RfD.--Addhoc (talk) 18:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, missed that. All good then. It's AC's to decide what to do, I assumed it was just a miss. PouponOnToast (talk) 18:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Need help merging article into another

Hello Adhoc, can you please help me merge an article I started on street children in Angeles....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_children_angeles_philippines.... into street children in the philippines.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_Children_in_The_Philippines.... Ive placed a merge proposal banner on the street children in angeles article and the content has already been added to the street children in the philippines article. Im just not sure what to do from there in so far as removing the street children in angeles article. kind regardsSusanbryce (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Susan, I've redirected the article - hope that is ok. Addhoc (talk) 18:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated for your help. kind regardsSusanbryce (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey...

Thanks for the help with regards to my user page, User:Eth01. Eth01 (talk) 23:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continued problems with Alan Davies article

Hello again.

There are still problems with User:Notaperm and the removing of certain information from the "Alan Davies" article. As was mentioned before, you said that the "Daily Mirror" could not be used as a reference, but "The Times" and "The Daily Telegraph" are. So, I put the information back using The Times and Daily Telegraph as references, which you claimed was acceptable. I put a discussion on the talk page about reaching a consensus about the issue.

Notaperm has deleted both the information (with the two new references) and the talk page discussion. I am not sure what to do here. Can you please help?

Thanks. ISD (talk) 08:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ISD, I would post on the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, and explain your concerns. Addhoc (talk) 08:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me the chance

I appreciate your giving me the chance to tackle it myself. As you can see, I found it redundant or detectable from what could easily go in. What you can also see is that I am incredibly ignorant of wiki markup .. plus I do not yet have the full citation for the Meissner material. He wrote it, has 96 PubMed citations over the past 40 years, is a board-certified psychiatrist and a psychoanalyst -- but I do have a letter into the publisher. Again, thank you very much. Spotted Owl (talk) 08:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MedCab

So you are aware, I posted a tongue-in-cheek request for MedCab volunteers on the assistance village pump: Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)#Informal mediation. I'd really like MedCab to be at the point were no case sits unadopted for more than a week. Cheers! Vassyana (talk) 09:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Davis redux

Hi. :) Even though I answered your note at my talk page, I thought I would stalk you to make sure you knew that I had. Given the potential sensitivity of the situation, I am concerned to be sure that I handle it correctly. Truly, feedback is welcome. I don't want to fan any flames. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

i am very sorry for the vandalism i have caused. please give me another chance as my son got hold of the computer and thought it was funny. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.158.108 (talk) 11:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Frances-the-Tool

Doing WP:CSD patrol I was considering deletion of User:Frances-the-Tool when I saw you had restored it. Is there any reason why this user page should not be deleted? It is still listed in CAT:CSD. Thanks for your attention. Alexf42 18:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexf, it could be considered a semi-humorous user page of an occasional editor, in which case it would be listed at MfD.--Addhoc (talk) 18:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanz talk 04:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Best pic I've seen

Doczilla's RfA

Golden Pass (Disney)

I de-prodded it per http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="Golden+Pass"+Disney+-wikipedia&btnG=Search (oh my, that got broken. You'll have to copy/paste it, I'm afraid). Feel free to take it to WP:XFD or request cleanup, it does need that. --Thinboy00 @772, i.e. 17:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there were 389 results, excluding what Google defines as "similar." --Thinboy00 @782, i.e. 17:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Card

Notifying new user of I-P arbcomm

Hi there Addhoc. I'm having great difficulty dealing with a new user at Syro-Palestinian archaeology and am admittedly frustrated. Despite my requests that he paste any sourced material he would like to see deleted from the article on the talk page for discussion first, he continues to delete sourced material without doing so. His last edit was a wholesale revert to his preferred version of a section that he composed, after I attempted to build on his edit (retaining most of his work) while adding material from scholarly sources. I do not think he is aware of I-P arbcomm and would benefit from being informed of it since he also edits at other I-P related articles such as Shuafat (where he also deleted sourced material and where I had first asked him not to do so without pasting it on talk and engaging in discussion first) and Unit 101, among others. I don't know where I am supposed to request that an editor be informed of the arbcomm case and since I noticed you having informed other new editors of it, I thought I would ask you directly. I hope that's not out of line and if it is, please let me know where I should turn for assistance in this matter. Thanks for considering this request. Tiamuttalk 21:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for posting the notice on my page. I believe I am editing in good faith, adhering to all normal modes of conduct. If you have any specific concerns, please let me know what they are. I have fully discussed alll the changes I have made. Canadian Monkey (talk)` —Preceding comment was added at 22:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nousernamesleft

Hi, Addhoc, thanks for voting in my RfA, which passed with 47 supports (I hoped for a perfect square, but two away is close enough!), 3 opposes (the first odd prime), and 0 neutrals. I'm glad the community has decided to trust me with the mop and bucket (the flamethrower isn't supported). Of course, special thanks goes to my nominators Auawise and that one guy who buried stuff (not that the thanks I give to the you isn't special!). If you ever need a hand with something, or just want to say hello, tough feel free to drop a line! Best wishes, Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 23:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't even vaguely resemble a mop, but I couldn't find a picture of one.

I can has thankspam?

Thank you

for the barnstar. It's gratifying to know that a few other people value the ideals of encyclopedicity, fairness and discretion as I do. Much appreciated. FCYTravis (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Safe Waif

Perhaps a redirect to List_of_Underdog_episodes instead of deletion? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 20:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me about this Arbcom injunction and what it means? Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 20:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The injunction is here, and I gather it doesn't apply to newly created articles. Addhoc (talk) 20:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's precisely what it says. Thanks! (Does this mean that regular users should NOT make such changes?) - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 21:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With due respect, I don't interpret the injunction that way. I admit I could be wrong, though. Powers T 22:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:HillaryForPrez2008.

Those look like test edits to me... not sure why an indef block is necessary (I was just about to remove him/her from AIV, and re-suggest the sandbox, in a clearer, unbotly way--not that I'm capable of doing that...). · AndonicO Hail! 17:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AndonicO, I've unblocked, although I'm not entirely convinced, if they are test edits, there appear to be far more than I would expect for a good faith editor. Addhoc (talk) 17:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OhanaUnited's RFA

Affirmative prayer

You seem to have speedied this article as A3, after the content had first been removed from the article by somebody else; the original article before that removal did have content. I suggest you restore it. DGG (talk) 20:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to fix this mistake. Addhoc (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of live sockpuppet discussion

Hi! According to the message presently displayed at Wikipedia_talk:Suspected_sock_puppets/UkraineToday_(6th) you deleted the page because it "is a talk page of a page which has been deleted, is itself currently tagged for speedy deletion, or has never existed (CSD G8)". Since it's the talk page for an open sockpuppet case which is awaiting consideration and gathering evidence, it doesn't seem to make sense that it would fall into any of these categories. If it contained discussion, please can you re-instate or clarify the reason for its deletion? Thanks -- Timberframe (talk) 14:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Thanks for restoring it. -- Timberframe (talk) 17:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Findsources

Appreciate your comment at Template talk:Findsources#Free vs. pay sources. Wonder if you'd object to me reverting your most recent edit to the template. Cheers, cab (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal

Could I join as a volunteer? I've been involved with mediation on a few occasions before, albeit to a lesser extent than that of what happens over at MedCab. Regards, Rudget. 17:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rudget, you are most welcome to join. Addhoc (talk) 17:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Rudget. 17:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block.

You asked for it... · AndonicO Hail! 01:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ZOMG mods abuse!?! Addhoc (talk) 11:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]