User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 11

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett/archive_11.

Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 archives.

If I deleted your article, it may be possible for me to restore it. Please post a message for reconsideration of the deletion. and you can read Why was my page deleted?

please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

---

EuroCsys

I am truly sorry that I did not complain before the deletion of the Eurocsys article, the reason was that I was amazed that your policies allow all Vegas Hotels or Porno magazines to “inform” their clients their background, but not a foundation dedicated to fund and provide education and technology around the world. This situation is sad but I will respect your policies. EuroCsys will not post any "advertising" again.

David Cohen EuroCsys Foundation

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Thanks, Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna assume that you declined the speedy on this article since you proded it. I'm just curious if the present version is different from the previously deleted version? Tiderolls 10:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the other deleted article was very very similar, but had a picture of David Spade on it for some reason. His personal web site confirms the facts, so vandalism delete is hard to justify. Was there a AFD before?Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the previous version was deleted less than 15 minutes before the creation of this one. It could've been an hour and 15 min.; daylight savings time is confusing my understanding of my watchlist history. That's the main source of my curiosity. I didn't think the creator had enough time to write a completely different article. Oh well, it's no big deal. I think the result will be the same in any event. Thanks for your response. Regards Tiderolls 10:43, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think there were enough claims to avoid a speedy delete, but that refs do not support notability, but it was not vandalism. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:46, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not speedy delete redirects things without first doing some basic research. A quick search off or on wiki would have provided you with the relevant information.--Sinistrial (talk) 11:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did there was nothing reliable, just a question on facebook, and a blog. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basic searching on-wiki should've brought you to Talk:Marina_Orlova#Marina_Rodina_Real_or_model_name.2Falias_sources.--Sinistrial (talk) 12:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, use Talk:Marina Orlova to talk about this as others are interested too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the article deleted? They're a noteworthy band at this point, and I believe said band deserves an article here on Wikipedia. It should NOT be deleted. Maybe when it was first made and they weren't so noteworthy then it could be deleted, but since they're getting out there and getting recognized and touring with bands on a bigger scale, as well as having an EP out and they're recording a full-length, they need the article. The Word Alive's article should NOT be deleted. --Raktoner Get At Me Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 10:19 AM Local Time —Preceding undated comment added 14:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I would like to second the motion that this band is sufficiently noteworthy to be on Wikipedia and should be "undeleted". (If nothing else, I can cite a dozen similar bands with lesser accomplishments and notability that have pages here.) However, on their own merit, this band should be reinstated. One of their songs made enough of a splash to be selected for inclusion in the game Rock Band (http://www.rockband.com/music/artists/The_Word_Alive). They have an EP already released (Empire, Fearless Records) and a full-length CD coming July 21 (Deceiver, Fearless Records - see http://www.fearlessrecords.com/viewband.php?band_id=44.) Their lead singer has been in at least three other bands that have Wikipedia pages - Emarosa, In Fear and Faith, and Greeley Estates, which makes him notable for his participation in those supposedly notable bands, as well as enhancing their notability by their having once included a member who is now in a band whose star is rising. The Word Alive has played Warped Tour, Bamboozle, and tours nationwide. There are multiple references to the band in Revolver magazine, HM (Hard Music) Magazine, AltPress, MetalHammer, We Are Hunted, Kik Axe Music, Metal Underground, Absolute Punk, and elsewhere. They are known to last.fm (1,008,165 plays by 82,368 listeners). The Empire EP landed them #15 on Billboard's Heatseakers chart and #10 on the Alternative New Artist Chart. In terms of followers, their Facebook page has over 10,000, and they also have followers on MySpace, Twitter, YouTube and other social sites. All in all, I think there is adequate notability for a Wikipedia page -- without the added argument that they are clearly more notable than several other bands with pages, and those bands' pages are not routine targets for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.239.210 (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at User:Raktoner/The Word Alive, a userspace draft. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the work you have been doing on this template. I noticed that you added a find sources to the template, but that violates WP:ELNO point 9. I'd like to get your thoughts on this, and possibly open this up to more feedback somewhere. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 03:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I won't copy paste the title, but according to google translate, the title of the page is "Category: WikiProject Music" in farsi, and the page text itself is unclear, but appears to be advertising for a band, although on second look maybe for a new music wiki. I didn't just tag it because it's foreign though--I think that given the translations, speedy's still appropriate. Doesn't really matter either way, but in case you revisit it, something to keep in mind. Shadowjams (talk) 09:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. :) I see that permission has arrived at Heiliggeistkirche (Munich) per your edit summary, but there's no link to the ticket #, and the only ticket I was able to find in OTRS was closed as unsuccessful because it did not provide usable license (Ticket:2010040110042873). Since you're not actively editing at the moment, I've blanked the article, just until the ticket # is produced. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, never mind! I can resolve this one at today's CP board without a ticket #. I've had a look at the source, and I see it is now licensed properly there. I'll restore the text, attribute on the article face and mark it done. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note I have moved the prospective article to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2009 Singapore Romanian diplomat incident

This frees up the page Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2009 Singapore Romanian diplomat incident, where we can discuss developments.

This hopefully avoids the problems of the various discussions split over several user talk pages.

The page title was changed following discussions and concerns over WP:BLP1E - further discussion can continue on the talk page.

Best,  Chzz  ►  13:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am Bill E from NYCSubway. That's how I was able to upload the full original version of the photo. There is nothing I can do about adding any notices on the nycsubway.org website since I do not own it; however I have added a note that I submit photos to nycsubway.org on my username page. I don't edit wikipedia a lot so I might not be familiar with all the details about it but thank you for helping me out! Error46146 (talk) 00:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Weekend Special, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weekend Special. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. B.Wind (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I was just wondering - is the Juan SaltSinker only blocked at ENWP due to your block, or are all accounts with this name blocked? The main reason I brought up the case was that I got the impression he was cross-wiki spamming.

- Tournesol (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Vic Garth. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vic Garth. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove backlinks and inclusions when deleting a page, thanks. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 12:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

getting the chop even as you ask. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you axed them before I did. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am the creator of Tomomi Nishimoto's article which has been deleted last month and currently ready to create a completely new article on the same topic with sufficient citations and references. Would it be OK to move on and start wrtining the article? or would there be anything I need to do beforehand since my article was deleted previously? Thanks.RUGGER (talk) 04:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had just started creating the page yesterday and did not have time to finish it in one go. Can you please atleast send me a copy of the page so I can fully finish it and then post it all at one time? --gupta.arm (talk) 18:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. How are you doing? I'm not exactly sure what you meant here. Do you really think he took that picture himself? He has uploaded at least two images from other websites that he claimed were his own. Thanks. --Local hero ^talk 21:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme. I think you were mistaken when you declined the speedy deletion of Template:Provinces of Sri Lanka‎. Because the consensus of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 April 6#Template:Provinces and Districts of Sri Lanka was to delete the two newly created templates (Template:Provinces of Sri Lanka‎, Template:Districts of Sri Lanka). Kind regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 12:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although that was stated by some voters, the closing comment asked for this to be discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka. This talk does not appear to have happened yet. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thanks. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello graeme, if thats your real name, i would just like to say your opinion in the speedy deletion of nathan Konarski has resulted in his death. I hope your proud because I sure am not proud to call YOU an Auzzy , Cheers mate shuve it up your clit! AvalonKids —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avalonkids (talk • contribs) 00:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:DTTR. Goodbye.--Once-An-IP (talk) 19:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That "regular" began on March 14 as IP80.564.583.0 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and created his new user ID Once-An-IP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) on the 15th. His attitude, and this particular topic interest (bacon), reminds me of the attitude and one of the non-controversial interests of a certain user who was banned a few days before this one turned up. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although the IP 80.564.583.0 geolocates to Italy, if I did it right, so I might be barking up the wrong sock. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks carrot eater, I will need to be more certain before blocking! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the users talk page history? I certainly warned them several times, but the IP blanked his talk page in between. Sorry for bringing it up again I just want to check whether I actually hadn't given enough warnings for next time. PS, see this on WP:AIV for my request and your response. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'd like to request the page for We Are The In Crowd to be reviewed and restored. They were originally deleted for not being a notable band and then locked for being recreated. However, this band is notable. They are signed to a reputable label^[1], tour nationally on high profile tours^[2], have releases on Amazon ^[3] and iTunes^[4], and are covered regularly in national print and online press. Their merchandise is sold through major retailers like Glamour Kills^[5] and Hot Topic^[6]. They are also endorsed by major companies like Fender ^[7] and Ernie Ball. Below are a few of the links covering the band.
Hopeless Records
Absolute Punk (all posts tagged with "We Are The In Crowd")
Punknews.org
AntiMusic
Fender
Fearless Radio
iDobi Radio interview
AltSounds
Vans Blog
Puregrainaudio

There is a lot more coverage, but hopefully the above will be enough to help you reconsider.
Thank you!

Jafee1977 (talk) 17:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw that you protected Thug Motivation 103 from being created again, which at the time was a good move. However, I began to make the article on one of my userpages. When I felt like it was good enough for the mainspace I tried to move it and couldn't. I requested a move and I got no response. So since it was ultimately your call could you check out the page I created and either move it onto the mainspace or unprotect the article so I can do it? Thank you. SE KinG. ^{User page.} _Talk. 16:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, could you please move the page Turkish frigate Ertuğrul into Ottoman frigate Ertuğrul. As stated in the discussion page, ottoman is more logical since the republic of Turkey was established only in 1923. Best regards--Kimdime (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TXS!--Kimdime (talk) 15:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the article was re-created was because it was wrongfully deleted. The article met WP:MUSICBIO. I posted this information on the talk page too!

1. 1 Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.

Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.

1. 2 Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network. Candyo32 (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well per WP:MUSICBIO her song can just be in rotation, or and press releases are reprinted our publications where she talks about herself. And about the 12 hour thing, the user who nominated it for deletion the second time re-nominated it less than 12 hours after deletion was declined! It was on the talk page, but that version is gone. Candyo32 (talk)

I'm talking about the first time it was declined, not on that revision of the talk page, the one before the 2nd nomination was started. Then I think it was the Bongo user that re-nominated it less than 12 hrs. Candyo32 (talk) 13:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that, probably unknowing to the person who started the DRV, the old article was for a completely different game than the one the person wanted to have a page on (and I found sources for). Not sure if this means it should be deleted again, or simply changed completely in user space, but...yeah. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 14:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well the person, who I though was User:Make is free to change it in anyway they wish as it is a userspace draft. So it can become a completely different game article (rather than the one it started with) and if others want to have an article on another game with the same name, we will need disambiguation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme, I just uploaded a photo of a book cover to illustrate an article on the book. Since you seem to have experience on this topic (you were helpful on another photo last November), I was wondering if, when you get a chance, you could check out that I've done everything right: File:Radhakrishnan-TPU-cover.JPG If everything looks OK, I may use it as my personal prototype for uploading a few other book covers to illustrate other book articles in the next few weeks. (NB: I can see some details in the actual book cover that are not visible in the uploaded scan, confirming the lower-resolultion). Many thanks in advance. - Health Researcher (talk) 22:11, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! (FYI: I added book dimensions, but the book doesn't seem to name the artist or explain the image, so in that regard I made no changes) Have a great week! Health Researcher (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have done what you suggested and have either tagged stubs or other problems from the New Pages article. I have also gotten somebody to adopt me and help me out. Thanks for sending me in the right direction (Mr. R00t) Contact me —Preceding undated comment added 22:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I have responded to your note on my own page. I am very interested in the New Page Patrol. Mr. R00t ^{Contact me} 14:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. I just was a little upset this morning and was being fairly rude. Apologies Mr. R00t ^{Contact me} 22:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On the page File talk:Wiki.png has started a discussion and voting for the file Wiki.png to be returned to older version. Please get involve in discussion. Thanks, Aleksa Lukic (talk) 09:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you add #p-logo a {background-image: url(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6b/Wiki.PNG) !important;} to your monobook.css file, then do a hard refresh, you should get the old logo back. Prodego ^talk 21:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Worked! Thanks. I followed PhilKnight's protection example, even though unnecessary. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You de-prodded the original article Yō Takeyama based upon the g-hits you found. I belive the results have shown that your inclination was the correct one. Perhaps you might visit the article and let me know if it being improved from this to THIS has addressed your original thoughts toward its potential. Thank you. --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually only declined a speedy delete, to give the article more or a chance to be reconsidered. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only? That "only" acted to improve the encyclopedia. Keep up the good lookin' out. And thanks. --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks far better now, I think the article is here to stay. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, regarding our previous discussion, could you restore File:Wikimania_party.jpg? You'll see from [1] that the licence has now been changed. Thanks, Cormaggio ^{is learning} 13:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

restored. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Graeme Bartlett has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Graeme Bartlett's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Graeme Bartlett! Peace, Rlevse 00:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou!

Just to be clear, I hope our exchange here is coming across as a legitimate exploration of the correct process for this situation, as opposed to contentiousness. I think it is a fascinating issue. (We may also have to address File:Secmarilla Bandera.png, but I'm less concerned about the image.)

Congrats on your Wikipedia day, that is quite impressive.--SPhilbrickT 14:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this note because of your participation in WT:Revision deletion#Community consultation, which is referred to in Wikipedia:VPR#Proposal to turn on revision deletion immediately (despite some lingering concerns). –xeno^talk 14:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About the page for Taylor Dinsmore, i spent maybe an hour working on it last night. i didnt have the time to refrence all the facts about his life, nor was i able to include why he is important. please send me that page, so i can futher edit it. thanks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fkgiggles1969 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#Universe_daily_spammer, added - thanks for reporting this, Finn Rindahl (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mata Hari & Doutzen Kroes are among the most famous Frisian people known. I included their ethnicity in their articles but it was removed because the editor said it was controversial and I needed to give a source? Could you please look into this? It looks a bit strange to me! Kind regards, BerndGalama (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could find a source? 86.89.146.118 (talk) 11:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The findings so far for Mata Hari:

F:Adam Zelle, geboren 2 oktober 1840 L
 FF:Cornelius Zelle, geboren 21 januari 1812 L
  FFF:Adam Selle
    FFFF: Herman Otto Zelle ~1743 d apr 1806 [2]
    FFFM: Huberdina Servaas ~1747 d jan 1810 
  FFM:Minke Elzinga
 FM:Grietje Hamstra, geboren 12 juni 1811 L
  FMF:Coenrad Hamstra Geboren op 10 april 1785 L
    FMFF:Albert Jennes Hamstra
    FMFM:Grietie Pieters Wijnbergen b ~1749
  FMM:Truyke Berkenbijl
M:Antje van der Meulen, geboren 21 april 1842 F
 MF:Johannes Hendericus van der Meulen 19 Nov 1809 L
  MFF:Bouwe Ydes van der Meulen 12 dec 1756 L
    MFFF:Yde Bouwes van der Meulen
    MFFM:Aafke Douwes Gorter
  MFM:Antje Paulus Haitsma 11 november 1778 F
    MFMF:Paulus Haitsma
    MFMM:Janneke van der Meulen
 MM:Sjoukje Faber
  MMF:Yme S Faber 8 Apr 1779 F 
    MMFF:Sipke Faber
    MMFM:Martha Ymes
  MMM:Sjoukje Romar 29 februari 1784 F
    MMMF:Paulus Romar apoteker 
    MMMM:Sjoukje Ottes Salverda 8 april 1750 F
      MMMMF:Otte Lucas Salverda
      MMMMM:Trijntie Johannes Oosterbaen

L=Leeuwarden F=Franeker Frisian to at least 3 generations all around.

each supported by either primary documents or online database references. This is actually original research though. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a ref to the lot: [3]. So no longer OR. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed at with 99 support, 9 oppose, and 2 neutral. Your support was much appreciated.

Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up my Yosemite pic... much obliged! Qfl247 (talk) 21:30, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For

Unprotection, This page has been protected for a year now, so let's give it another try. Checker Fred (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Put your request to User talk:AnmaFinotera. The protecting admin has retired. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the editor is not an admidChecker Fred (talk) 23:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was my first image categorizing, I think, sorry I had it wrong... all I could tell from the flag was that it wasn't right. My ignorance is reduced. Hopefully I'll get it right on future images. Thanks again. - Sinneed 01:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CSD F2 if you read it, says nothing about Commons images, there is also a WP:AN thread on that.

G6 was being used until F2 /F8 'explicitly' has the appropriate wording.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone changed the criteria without consensus, but changed back. My instructions say file page for page on commons. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. Rollback rights are more what I was looking for - it seems I didn't adequately research this prior to nominating myself. I am, however, confused about your comment that I have only been active since April of this year. According to my user contributions (at least from what I can see on my account) I have been active on a fairly regular basis since 2006 (save for very little activity actually on the account in 2007). Lately, I have been better about remembering to login when I make changes so they are actually credited to me instead of a rotating IP address. Is there some kind of problem with my contributions listing from your end? I'd appreciate any help in sorting it out. Recently I've been more active and I've been doing more to figure out all of the tools and features so that I can contribute the best way I can. I will de-nominate myself for adminship if the trend continues towards opposition and possibly try again in the future when I have a better grasp of the finer technical points of the Wikipedia system. Thanks again for your input. Chrisbrl88 (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme Bartlett

I was unable to confirm the assumption behind the edit summary for this reversion of my addition of a {{notability}} template. My own searches were unable to find any magazines that covered the topic at all, or any reliable books that appeared to give any significant coverage to the topic. Certainly the article itself doesn't provide any such sources. Hence I reverted your removal of the template. If you could let me know the works to which you were referring, perhaps I would change my views.

Regards, ^Bongo_matic 01:43, 24 May 2010 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.[reply]

This has appeared in the Enigma newsletter, (and Enigma control list 22) and the numbers and oddities newsletter. Also Popular Communications). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Moved to talk page if you don't object. ^Bongo_matic 09:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, putting a copy there, I was not going to add a reference to the article until there was a more specific reference. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:01, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Simonter (talk · contribs) was doing you a favor when he replaced a real-life name with an editor's Wikipedia name. Identifying Wikipedia editors by their real name, when they have not done so themselves first, is considered WP:OUTING and is highly discouraged. A first name may not seem such a detailed piece of information, but given the context of the discussion, it is sufficient for other editors to know that the editor in question has a very definite conflict of interest in terms of the article being edited. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 10:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The editor clearly outed themselves, and has never complained about using the name. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In what way did the editor out themselves? The first use of a proper name was yours. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:45, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See here:[4] and here [5], there is not hiding of identity here. The COI is not a reason to delete, but a reason to pay attention to promotion etc. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the mistaken CSD, I need to learn more about images. [6]. Would the CSD be F7 (invalid rationale) now? Thank you.--Omarcheeseboro (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It has been suggested to move the page Trivandrum Central Railway Station to Trivandrum Central.It is currently the redirect page of Trivandrum Central Railway Station. To move the page Trivandrum Central has to be deleted. I think you can help. Binoy (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the move of Trivandrum Central. Binoy (talk) 13:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme,

Just thought you might like to know that your sketch of Cloudina has been picked up in a Discovery news article. Congrats (-:

Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 18:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Martin, you got plenty of quote in that article! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graeme, many thanks for your help a few weeks ago about uploading book covers, which has guided me to successfully uploading several. Today I encountered a puzzle: How to properly record the cover of a book that is freely downloadable from the internet, and bears the statement "Please contact the (name of organization that prints it) for additional copies of this publication, which may be used and reprinted without special permission." I wasn't sure exactly how this should be configured, or whether this means they do NOT have a copyright (nothing about copyright is mentioned in searching the downloadable version). The image in question is here, and I've already embedded it in the article about the book. But have I put in the proper text to document the image, or should I change it somehow? Many thanks in advance. Health Researcher (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick response on my talk page. That helps clarify - that all rights have not been released. So I think that means that I filled out the image template correctly. (I don't think it's necessary to try to persuade the organization to release any additional rights) The one possible image template change that comes to mind is to change the sentence "Appears to lack copyright, but this is not explicitly stated" to read something like "No copyright is claimed within the book, but neither is there any explicit statement about the work being in the public domain." Do you think the latter sentence would be preferable to the former (current) sentence? (file is here) Many thanks -- Health Researcher (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

---

--Hello Graeme! Thank you for your help on the Jacki Randall page. I've been trying to find some fresh links to replace the newly dead, but still struggling. I am new to this and having some difficulty navigating. I wonder if you could please help me with posting a photo for this bio. What I tried to upload is this; http://www.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?uid=AAAAAQAQmSVhd1zTob5rj7PkDBTxjgAAAAnDF3A0YC_57GjAisPzNsKb -but I must be doing something wrong, I believe this is accepted as public domain. I hope to be a more active contributor soon, please forgive my lapses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyybird (talk • contribs) 23:28, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had assumed that the work of the organisation would be in the public domain until I saw that the main page for the INL website ([7]) has a notice at the bottom stating "Copyright © 2010 Idaho National Laboratory". I'm sorry for my mistake, I have to admit I don't have a great understanding of how the whole US government pd thing works and assumed if the organisation could copyright one thing then anything else they produced wouldn't be automatically in the public domain. I apologise for the inconvenience and will seek advice before placing such tags in the future, the tags I placed on Cold crucible induction melting and Integrated waste tracking system - copies of similar content - should probably also be removed. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Graema. In the Cherry Ripe (numbers station) page, you've referenced a Betascript Publishing book: Lambert M. Surhone (2009). Numbers Station: Shortwave, Radioteletype, Secret Broadcast, Letter Beacon, Lincolnshire Poacher, Cherry Ripe, Yosemite Sam. Betascript Publishing. ISBN 6130310382. Do you know what kinds of books are produced by this publishing house? See: User:PrimeHunter/Alphascript Publishing sells free articles as expensive books, VDM Publishing, and a scanned example. Playmobilonhishorse (talk) 06:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may be best not to include it as a reverence, but if a book picks a topic it indicates notability, even if it is useless as a source (in this case). 09:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I've had that userbox for a while now; I thought the policies were unfair when I put it up, but I guess I can take it down now. I've reconsidered upon studying them more. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 09:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Iggle Pop Logo and other games' logo uploaded by me (Big Money, Bookworm Adventures, Venice,...) will be tagged for deletion.

(I think they're beautiful logos, but) In Wikipedia, video game's articles discouraged to use logo for game, encourage to upload boxart. So, I follow the guideline. Tuanese (反馈) 11:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Tuanese (反馈) 11:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My article was deleted but it wasn't finished! I pressed save page by mistake and didn't have the chance to respond to your speedy deletion list in time - please re-consider this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukirednffc (talk • contribs) 13:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It did not look as if it was going to become a suitable article with a claim of importance, Do you want to have the article as a userspace draft, where it won't be deleted so fast? at User:Ukirednffc/The Chlenstvo Brothehood Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

yes please - can you email it to me? And can other members edit it too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukirednffc (talk • contribs) 13:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graeme, you removed the SD tag on an article (Sebastian Reid) I started today because you said it had enough claims for no speedy delete. I stared a very similar article stub today and it got the same SD tag but it was deleted quickly (within nine hours) even though it had more info re: importance than the article you saved. The article was on German stage, television, and film actress Antje Thiele. Here is the article archived on my user page: [8]. Would you not consider that it is worthy of a reinstatement? Here is the conversation I'm having with the editor who deleted it: [9]. And here is the deletion review -- my request that it be reinstated: [10]. Could you please comment/vote on the deltion review? Thanks very much. Softlavender (talk) 16:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Boytown Comhar (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC) I think you must be very gullible if you think Boytown is marked on Google maps. Anybody can mark things like this and then save it and put in on any site they like. However, if you go into Google Earth directly and search this area for Boytown, I can guarantee you, you won't find it because it doesn't exist. And as for the place you suggest it is close to - while I don't deny it exists - its nothing at all except an area of blanket bog near the little roadway that happens to have a name. I think you should put my markers back on because as you live in the Netherlands and I live in North Mayo I know this is a farce and is not true. Somebody will be having a good laugh at you for believing this nonsense.[reply]

You saved it from SD; now it's gone to AfD. Care to comment? [11]. Thanks for your consideration, and happy Wiki-ing. Softlavender (talk) 01:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graham, it's me again ;) Would you mind hide (I think that now en:admin have also access to the light oversight) 2 versions of the article IHH (İnsani Yardım Vakfı) [12] and the one following, the copyvio comes from [13] ? Sincerly --Kimdime (talk) 05:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TXS (and sorry for misspelling your name)--Kimdime (talk) 09:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good you spotted the change, my first attempt at this revision hiding, I have been off watching TV. You are way down the list of people who misspell my name, so no worries! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The material has been readded again multiple times. Same source material is copied word for word. nableezy - 00:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this time there are 33 revisions with problems, and lots if intermediate edits, so it will just have to stay. Deleting the revisions will cause attribution problems. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you declined the G12. I don't care much either way but this was the search that I used to find the text. The author has obviously copy/pasted then changed words around. It's in that gray area of looking the same because it obviously shares the same info and a copyright issue. I just wanted you to know so that you don't think I'm a deletion hungry editor. Just trying to protect Wikipedia from dubious or unambiguous additions of copyrighted material. OlYeller^Talktome 08:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for deleting Webrumy. Would you take out Dogrumy and Indrumy as well? Both were created at the same time as Webrumy. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, though I am working my way backwards through the alphabet! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re this one, fair enough not a speedy, but the references you have supplied so far are from a website/blog that describes itself as 'unofficial site of your local league'. The club itself is sponsored by its local pub. This an amateur team playing in a local league and falls short of meeting WP:GNG or any sporting sub levels. Nuttah (talk) 09:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They prove it exists, (step 1) there are lots more refs, so if you can identify the good ones please add them. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the club exists, but they do not show notability. There are no 'good ones', the club is a local district team, playing in a local district league with many GHits of results in the local press. Nuttah (talk) 09:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think you could explain this action in slightly greater detail than you already have? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►directorate─╢ 11:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined the speedy delete as the article is about a software item, which is not a candidate for speedy delete A7. A prod could be used instead. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon what may be technical ignorance, but are iPhone applications not actually web-content? ╟─TreasuryTag►Counsellor of State─╢ 11:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only in so far as that is where they are loaded from. Most software can be found on the web somewhere, but that does not put it in the category of web content. If it is not just part of a web site, but is intended to be downloaded and run on a computer then I don't count as web content. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.

I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.

Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.

Thank you!  7  15:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The entry for Movies You May Have Missed was flagged and deleted under this statement: A7 (Article about a web site, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject).

The initial MYMHM entry possessed as much relevant information than say the entry for Film Riot which it is still present and can be flagged for the exact same reasons. The podcast's concept, much in the same way Left Field Cinema, is quite notable for inviting people to watch and appreciate forgotten, cult-like, missed and soon-to-be-missed films. The content and breath of their episodes is wide, going in depth within many aspects of a film from its production to its significance at the time of release and how well it has held up today. Many Wikipedia entries of films they have covered now have links to their episodes.

• Man Bites Dog (film)
• Seconds (film)
• The King of Comedy (1983 film)
• Intacto
• The Impostors
• The Five Obstructions
• Pontypool (film)

I consider it's deletion premature and request that it's deletion be reconsidered. It's initial entry was quite short and thus lacked significance. But it was intended as a stepping stone, as are many other entries on Wikipedia, to expand it's content and context. It is, from what I've witnessed of internet podcasts over the years, a significant (or to the very least an interesting) entry within the scope of Internet Culture and Podcasting.

Thank you for your time, Chauncey McAskill 20:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shimoroka (talk • contribs)

An article you voted to restore, and gave good advice on — Antje Thiele — has been AfD'ed by the editor who speedily deleted it. If you consider it worth keeping (it's obviously still a stub), could you vote in the AfD? If so, thanks and best regards. Softlavender (talk) 23:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was wondering if I could make a request for my account to be blocked for a few weeks to remove any temptation for me to edit during what will be a very busy time for me in real life. I noticed your name in the category of admins willing to accept such requests, so I thought I'd ask. I've tried the wikibreak enforcer, but my knowledge of how to get around this has made it a slightly less effective solution.

If possible, I would like for both my primary account Lear's Fool (talk · contribs) and my alternate account Lear's Fool (Sock) (talk · contribs) to be blocked until June 29 of this year. I would prefer if the ability to edit their respective talkpages was also blocked, but they were still able to e-mail, but I don't mind if this ability is also removed. If you are willing to accept this request, could you please let me know before you implement the block so I can put appropriate notices on my userpage and talkpage? Thanks for your time.  -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 05:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 11:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a German?--Inventor 23:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inventor (talk • contribs)

Alright Demostheneskostapapasjr working on online definition of Universal Absolutism, and all the information to it. The US army considers it to be a religion, and it is written on my military issued Government verified Dog tags. I am wondering why there is no internet place to go to find out more about it, so I decided to explicitly write what it is so that other people outside myself can understand it better. I was in the process of creating an online reference center via Wiki. I was not finished. I still have a lot fo work todo but right now I have to establish a foothold. And that foothold begins with keeping a page for Universal absolutism that is separate from regular Absolutism or regular Universalism, since there are multiple versions of each, and Universal Absolutism is very specific in what it partains to. I would like to at least know the reason why you in specific chose to delete the page and what we can do to bring it to where it needs to be with all the credit its due. How do we get that done? demostheneskostapapasjr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demostheneskostapapasjr (talk • contribs) 19:08, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain why you think Overweight cats is a valid topic despite the fact that the author blatantly copied it from Cat and has hardly made an effort to accurately covering the topic? Thanks! PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 14:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I just asked this of CactusWriter before I saw you declined the deletion. The copy is apparently copied from Wikipedia, but only licensed under GFDL, so as it stands it's still a copyvio per Wikipedia:Licensing update. However, if the history is restored it could fix this problem. Assuming the history is fixed, should it also just be re-deleted under A7 or sent to AfD? VernoWhitney (talk) 11:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

VernoWhitney (talk) 12:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

VernoWhitney (talk) 12:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find myself in disagreement with your decline of the speedy on this page. We should not have pages, even as redirects, perpetuating random gratuitous scatological punning alleged nicknames of seminotable people. Would you be willing to reconsider your view on this? I really hesitate either to give further publicity to this nonsense with a 7-day RFD discussion, or to unilaterally invoke the hardcore aspect of the BLP policy, which seem to be the two alternative next steps open to me, but I'm not very comfortable leaving that redirect sitting around, either. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson#Your Request for Adminship which you are, of course, very welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Graeme Bartlett, I wanted to know why you deleted the talk page for this file and had such an edit summary when the file itself is clearly there. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 17:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with this French article?Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 19:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, My name is James and Im an RC patroller. I'm sorry to pull you away from your work, just wanted to ask a question to someone more experienced. I refere you to this article which was recently rolledback using huggle by an RC patroller. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nochex&diff=prev&oldid=370096125 I'm aware that RC patrollers are only allowed to revert articles if it is clearcut Vandalisum. Would you be able to look at the Diff of the article (the link i gave you there) and let me know in that event whether that really is clear cut vandalisum.

Thanks for your help. James'ööders 14:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If look at the users contributions, it was legitimate as they were all unsourced.  – Tommy [message] 16:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about not signing, I've done it thousands of times now, I should know better. Thanks for taking the time to look at that article for me, Im just a little concerned. I Noticed that a Rollbacker (tommy2010) using huggle is reverting (last time I checked) an enormous amount of pages, 80% of them, an example such as the one I showed you which was not clear cut vandalisum. I'm just thought I would raise the issue due to the fact that I've heard that huggle can cause alot of harm is used incorrectly. James'ööders 14:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem, So do you mean that you can issue a wraning first and then leave it at that? I mean Yer removing chunks of articles isnt quite oviouse vandalisum but it is a little sus. otherwise you could just click the revert without warning button? James'ööders 15:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh I see now, Thankyou Soo much for your assistance Graeme I appreciate it :D James'ööders 03:08, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. It probably isn't a big deal, but when you deleted an old revision of this file, I don't think you waited the 7 days that {{Non-free reduced}} suggests. I tagged the file on the 26th UTC, and it is the 27th today.--Rockfang (talk) 04:41, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that is what the procedure says. Well I requested the reduce, and I was happy with the result. Anyway if anyone wants the big version back please say so. (earlier I recued from speedy delete of the whole thing due to mislicense when FUR would do). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:11, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you revised my article and put it on hold because it was lacking reliable source. I have added those, but the article is still put on hold. What can I do now to publish it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ursa eva (talk • contribs) 10:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the article and put proper sources to it. Why you deleted my article ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamisatyadevanand (talk • contribs) 13:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is to be kept (I'm unfamiliar with the WP:FOOTY guidelines which is why I tagged it for an admin to look at), it needs the history from the deleted version restored to preserve attribution. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]