User talk:Blanchardb/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Impersonation

Thanks for the note. Good catch. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 03:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Why can't i delete: Cwmpennar?

I decided to delete the page mainly because i thought it was abit short and dosen't supply enough information. Please talk back.

Replied --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 21:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:ZX81's edits to Kindertransport

Sorry, but I think you've possibly reverted my reversion (and warned me) by mistake? (You've reverted it back to what I thought was the vandalised page)?

What happened is a glitch in Huggle. You beat me to the revert by 1/4 second, and, when I clicked revert, it was your version that I reverted. I realized it, undid what I did. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 22:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Your bot misidentified vandalism

I was correcting the gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid article jumbled because of vandalism, and your Huggle bot undoes my corrections, reverting the vandalism, and calling my work vandalism. You need to remedy your bot application. Thanks. 71.175.28.121 (talk) 01:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't exactly a bot, it was a one-click vandalism-revert software. Sometimes one just clicks the wrong button. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

What do you want —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.64.110 (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Teversham

Saw your reverts to this page and while I think the "Gang war" section isn't needed the rest looks ok. Article is pretty much blank otherwise. Unless you have any objections I will put back the good stuff. Avnjay^Talk 22:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Perfect. I was amazed myself when I saw how much text I removed. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 22:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk:The Twilight of Atheism

I started a new section to decide on whether or not we should keep the National Review quote. Mouse is back 22:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

hey

thanks for deleting my page. it was amazing. Live In Germany (talk) 00:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:PNT

Hi Blanchardb, I noticed you moved my boilerplate from the bottom of the "Pages for consideration" section to the top. I think it would be better to have it at the bottom, because people are more likely to pay attention to it there. For instance, I myself only skimmed through the intro when I first stumbled across the page, and went straight to the bottom of the section. If it's more visible (at the bottom), then users listing articles will be more likely to check the language, rather than you (or others) having to do it, as I've seen happening. Cheers, BalkanFever 10:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Before you proceed, you might want to check with Ummit (talk · contribs). He's the one who operates the bot Scsbot (talk · contribs), which inserts the date on the page every 24 hours. I moved the boilerplate as to not confuse that bot. Besides, if people follow the instructions on the {{notenglish}} tag literally, new pages for consideration will end up under the boilerplate anyway. Remember, most new entries are from people who were sent directly to the "edit section" page, and will see nothing but the coding of your boilerplate, and not the boilerplate itself. By moving the boilerplate to the top, at least, they will see it once their entry is submitted and may edit their entry accordingly. (If they don't, someone else will.) --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 20:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll leave it as it is then :). BalkanFever 22:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

thank you

thank you for reverting vandalism on the SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Fireteam Bravo 2 article on 20 June 2008. I have been reverting this vandalism on a daily basis for quite a while now and it is very nice to have a helping hand. You deserve an award for your diligence!!Killkola (talk) 00:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

thank you very much for the information you provided. i very much appreciate it, if i can help you in anyway just let me know.Killkola (talk) 06:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Mackerel

My addition to the Mackerel article is by no means unconstructive - it is factual and corroborated in the St. John's Wood article. I filled in the Edit summary clearly, and see no reason to delete the new section.

Please tell me why you keep reverting my changes to the Mackerel article - you say that I am not leaving an Edit summary which is simply untrue.Royshearer (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I am reverting it for a simple reason: your addition has no pertinence whatsoever, regardless of whether or not it is true. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Surely the matter of pertinence is entirely subjective? I would like to see how many others deem it of no pertinence. Royshearer (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Let me put it this way: the article is about a species of fish, not about a combination of letters in an English word. Therefore, since your addition has nothing to do with fish, it is not pertinent. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

So in what article might this section correctly reside? Are you saying I should start a new article purely for the 'word' mackerel, rather than the fish? Given that the word pertains to several dozen species of fish, I would propose that this article is in fact on the subject of the 'word' mackerel rather than any one fish. Royshearer (talk) 12:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

You could do that. But I'm telling you, such an article probably won't last a week before it gets deleted. People will ask, "Why single out this word?", and "So, why should I care?". Does this work with the French equivalent, maquereau, with the same station? Is St John's Wood the only station with no letter from the Spanish word caballa (mackerel)? If not, I don't think such information belongs anywhere in Wikipedia. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I see. So does that mean that you are going to delete the same information from the St. John's Wood tube station article? The bottom line is, you seem to be taking your judgement of pertinence as that of the rest of the community by blocking any representation of this information. It is a piece of well known trivia relevant to and recurrent in British culture, perhaps not others. That should not be a reason to discount it as I would hope that the aim of Wikipedia is to represent information in as broad a context as possible. Frankly, you are not combatting vandalism as much as you are discouraging me from ever contributing to Wikipedia, so thanks. Royshearer (talk) 23:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The kind of information you are referring to is a bit more pertinent in the St. John's Wood article than it is in the Mackerel article, but not much. I've already tagged it as trivial, but I'll let someone else do the deletion. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. Surely this information is entirely irrelevant to the St. John's Wood article, but utterly relevant to the St. John's Wood tube station article, for the reasons I have outlined in the discussion on that page. It may be 'trivia' but it is by no means trivial culturally. How can I get a third or tenth opinion on this? Royshearer (talk) 23:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that there was a separate article on the tube station. The {{trivia}} tag was there long before I saw the contents of the article. Maybe the right place for a discussion would be Talk:St. John's Wood tube station --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

True details on Christina

You can't just block something without reading the details. What gives you the right to remove true information if you don't have an appropiate reason to do so. This is not vanadalism. By using huggle, you are abusing the rights to change the details to your desire. What proof do you have that Christina McKinney is 39 and what evidence do you have to support your claims that this is false information?124.188.180.129 (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

True? I don't know, but the information is already found elsewhere in the article, so no need to repeat it. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for that comment I made earlier. I didn't wanted to offend you, it's just that I thought my point that I added in the article was removed as though nobody cared. I didn't see that but of information repeated earlier. 124.188.180.129 (talk) 03:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

sry

UR RESPONSE TIME IS AMAZING WHEN U DELETED MY BS REMARKS. DO U PRESS REFRESH ON EVERY PAGE ALL DAY? I AM IN AWE.

ALSO CAN I BE ADMIN? I PRESS REFRESH ALOT. 67.84.179.182 (talk) 21:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Huggle Wars

Hi there. Are you aware of this essay ? Sometimes huggle reverts and warns inappropriately, this happened here, and you warned user:Gail. Make sure to check all your reverts, of course it may mean that you should slow down your editing rate. Thanks for your efforts, Cenarium ^Talk 16:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this, I also hope that a new version will fix the problem. Happy editing, Cenarium ^Talk 18:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

S&M for deletion

As mentioned, it is a relatively new drinking game. Its not a figment of my imagination. Its origin is Murdoch Uni, Australia. It has seen some growth amongst the local population. Helpig (talk) 19:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not enough to change my mind. Just because something exists is not grounds for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 19:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Tony Dadson

Hi there. Not sure if you're watching this article or not, but it's been unblanked by the author, who has also taken out the AfD and CSD tags. I'll put them back in, but thought i'd let you know just in case. Ged UK (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

patron saints

what was unconstructive? I took out the language that was not neutral but the explanation is still there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.11.47 (talk) 01:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that you replaced a non-neutral view with another one. Although praying to the saints may not be condoned by the Catholic clergy (I don't know), I see it done by people on an almost daily basis. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 01:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I still don't understand though - does it not still say exactly the same things only without the nonneutral thing about serious blasphemy? (and without the nonneutral heading?) To me, neither the old version nor the change I made says anything about what the Catholic clergy condone (I also don't know the answer to that). Unless you mean the last paragraph that I did not touch? (64.231.11.47 (talk) 01:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC))

I have to go for the night. I left a note on the page explaining what I want to change and maybe someone who understands how to do it can make it. Sorry to have troubled you. (64.231.11.47 (talk) 02:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)).

No, all i saw was the "diff page" ([1]), where the last paragraph was shown only to provide some context. The fact is, the section as it existed before you touched it was about criticism of the whole concept by some denominations. It was clear from the text that it was how these denominations felt, and the tone of the text was such that their position was not presented as absolute truth.

Now my problem with your edit is, for the most part, the fact you changed the title of the section. Though what you wrote was still about criticism, the title change made a difference in the tone of the two paragraphs.

Also, you may have received a "vandalism" warning when I made the revert. That is simply because I was on anti-vandalism duty when I saw your edit, and I was using an automated revert-and-warn software. Believe me, I never saw your edit as pure vandalism, just a tad POV-pushing. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

Thanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 06:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Accusation of Vandalism

Hi, it's quite an allegation to accuse someone of vandalism, it would appreciated if could explain what you considered vandalism on my part 122.104.137.25 (talk) 12:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I was giving you a level 1 warning, which makes no mention of vandalism. Anyway, the information you inserted in Evolution as theory and fact is false. Fossils found in the ground are not theory. They are fact. Theory is the conclusions you draw from that. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Joe Horn and Quanell X

You know, as the case gets closer to a verdict, these two pages are going to be vandalized more...do you think a protection for 14 days might be appropriate?--Hourick (talk) 16:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

• Anything that would prevent undue confusion in the article. I think it should be protected until two weeks after the verdict. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 16:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

fair enough. Let's hope that IP'er gets a clue and moves on from the Horn page.--Hourick (talk) 16:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Appropedia

Dear Blachardb -- I am trying to fill out the applied sustainability space and appropedia is one of the main cites for the work. Rather than delete the page could you direct me on how to fix it to make it acceptable for wikipedia?

Thanks--Enviro1 (talk) 01:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the inappropriate tag

I'm still a bit new at this CSD thing. S. Dean Jameson 02:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Canada-Zimbabwe relations

I indicated the source at the buttom of the page. It's the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Robin Hood 1212 (talk) 19:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Katie Hoff

Well Katie is really beautiful and I think that's an important piece of information that her page deserves. I will continue to think about another (possibly more appropriate) way to convey this on her page. I guess I was trying to compliment her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.99.62 (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

June 2008

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! PeterSymonds (talk) 01:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit to bible

Per this edit, I agree that the link you gave is also fine, if you change the wording a bit. An interested reader clicking just the word creation is going to be a little confused. You're hiding too much information in the pipe, so can we change it a bit? Also, it would be polite not to assume bad faith straight up. Cheers, Ben (talk) 11:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC).

I've since had a go at rewording it to incorporate your link. Ben (talk) 12:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC).

It's no problem. In any case, I still think we need to reword the sentence a little. I've had a go, but do you have any suggestions? Ben (talk) 23:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

{{db-empty}}

Thank you for taking care of that. Cheers! --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 00:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

excuse me

on the Morganville Texas review,i wrote that and you told me it was vandalizm check my ip and everything i just didnt have an account when i wrote it. i wrote that article! check everything i WROTE IT!

Tkstreet (talk) 01:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the Simon Amstell page

I know you probably just saw it while patrolling recent changes, but there's been a lot of vandalism to it lately and it's good to know that others are taking note and helping out there as well, so thanks! ^_^ Rachel Summers (talk) 01:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

FiveThirtyEight.com

Please do not delete this page. Their methodology is often sited for its new, innovative polling prediction methodology in the Democratic Primary Election 2008. It gained attention for beating out most pollsters projections in North Carolina and Indiana in the heavily contested political primary race between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008. New polling methodology in the political world is of enormous economic and political impact. Many major publications have mentioned the site in relationship to the elections.

dummy entry to initiate archiving Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 01:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Applied Sustainability

Dear Blachardb -- You are killing me -- would the Applied Sustainability article be ok if I removed the appropedia link?

Thanks--Enviro1 (talk) 01:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

If you can also show some notability for the concept. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 01:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a ton of stuff on applied sustainability on the web -- I put in a good start for both the peer reviewed literature and a bunch of examples of AS centers at universities and in industry -- I think the article is finally up to snuff -- Please drop all deletion requests - Thanks --Enviro1 (talk) 15:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

University of the Cumberland's

Why are you defending them? Do you or did you go to school there? Do you or did you work there? What I said is/was true. If you don't like it that is fine, but truth is truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazarenec (talk • contribs) 15:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

You are adding potentially libelous comments with no reliable sources. Therefore, they must be considered false a priori and summarily removed. That you say it's true changes nothing. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 15:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

You still didn't answer my questions ... do you or did you attend this school ... do you or did you work there?

I've never heard of it before. Which changes nothing, since your comments are potentially libelous. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 15:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask help

Will you put this Image on Angel Locsin's article please --> image is Angel Locsin.jpg. Please because im just only a new user here in wikipedia so i cannot edit protected articles hte image was already reviewed and it has already a license. Please forgive me. Thankyou so much! Consciously Unique (talk) 04:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I cannot do it until the image itself is uploaded at Angel Locsin.jpg. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 10:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Radio (Musiq Soulchild song)

In regard to the proposed deletion nomination you put on this article, please note that the artist's notability is in fact clear. Two of Musiq Soulchild's albums, including his most recent one, have gone to #1 on the Billboard 200, the main album chart in the United States. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Weirdo

Check the page history please before you tag something for speedy. Weirdo was a perfectly valid stub on a notable comic before some nutbar vandalized it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 01:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Somebody

How do you get indefinetly banned from wikipedia?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.255.218 (talk) 16:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

130.65.151.99 vandalism

I don't know how this works, but I see you have been involved, and have been with Wikipedia for some time. It looks to me like anon user 130.65.151.99 is on a spree of vandalism: removing any information they disagree with without comment, adding original research, claiming that their additions are backed by citations that do not verify their claims. For example Opobo, States in Ancient Calabar Kingdom. Actually, apparently, many of the edits they have made.

24.130.9.180 (talk) 07:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know by what standards you call these edits vandalism, but aside from two instances of unexplained removal of content, this anonymous user's edits look pretty constructive to me. The instances of removal of content occurred in recently created articles that had little or no input from users other than the creators of these articles. Of course, I'm no expert in African matters, but under the circumstances, I believe the best way to go is for you to challenge him directly. Ask him where he gets his information, and you can work from there. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 11:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Peter Jones Review

I am aware that the text is heavily reliant on Smith's book; I'm not sure I have much of a choice here, there aren't really any other texts on Jones more than ~5 pages in length, except maybe his journals (problematic OR, I suspect). I plan to write an article specifically on the book to help address this concern (it's certainly the most comprehensive and authoritative text on the subject, by a good margin) but I wonder if you're aware of any other techniques specifically I could use to get around it? Thanks for the review, WilyD 16:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, you think so? I'm always reluctant to do stuff like that. The featured article review (in my highly limited exposure) seems pretty harsh about such things, and I'm reluctant to push any borders. I'd mix cites more thoroughly to keep it on the up-and-up, but I'm already concerned people will criticise it as oversighted (I do thoroughly cite usually). Thanks for the suggestion, though, I'll see what I can do. WilyD 01:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Christianity WikiProject Newsletter - July 2008

This Newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 08:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit?

Why did you revert this? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I only saw the diff. Looked to me like spam. In context, it looks like it belongs there. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome.

Thank you. Do I reply here? Or do I reply on my own page? I have taken the bold step (does this work WP:BOLD) of replying here. I hope I can do the right thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craig Fermwood (talk • contribs) 00:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No need to reply. Happy editing. :-) --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

my website wiki

I'm trying to write a wiki about my company's history and such, but it keeps getting deleted (your name was logged). Why can Amazon.com have a wiki page, but I can't?

Do you operate a company that is as well-known as Amazon? --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No. Is that why it's getting deleted?

Basically, yes. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (web). --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Burnley crest.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Burnley crest.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Gentrification in Augusta, GA

Hello,

Please assist me. I am trying to show the status of gentrification in Augusa, GA

Butch Palmer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameslizzman (talk • contribs) 19:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Knox Leon Jolie-Pitt

It looks like User:Bearcat restored the article right after you closed the discussion. Should another discussion be started or can the old one be re-opened? TN‑X-Man 20:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I restored it because I hadn't noticed that the article had both speedy and regular-AFD tags on it at the same time. The speedy tag shouldn't have been there once it had been nominated for AFD, and the discussion should be allowed to run its course. Bearcat (talk) 20:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It has been restored while I was in the process of closing the AfD... and suddenly, just as I clicked save, the redlink had become a bluelink. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 20:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Delet

Yes, I wanto to delet the article Riograndense Republic, and I explained why (it's a Nazi-like article).

But I don't know how it works here, I'd like to do a votation to see who agrees and who doesn't, but it looks difficult to do it, but I wanna do it. How can I? Opinoso (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me to ask for users' votes to delet or not that article. Opinoso (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Bible

In response to your revert, I didn't really delete all the much. I was actually restoring it to an earlier version. Too much has been added. I haven't stopped by in awhile, but I was tracking this matter when it was being discussed, even if I didn't participate much in it. Either way, it seems silly to go through and do one edit at a time to make the way it already was. As it stands, the introduction is redundant to itself. (Talks about two individual points twice in two different paragraphs. The second mention of each of the points regarding specific bible versions is way to specific for an introduction.) It also shows hella Christian-centric POV in how it refers to Judism (reminds me of how inappropriate it is to refer to China as "the Orient"). The big problem is this article's introduction constantly gets tagged by people wanting to say "Hey, you gotta mention my version of the bible too!". We can talk more about this in the article if you like. I will start making the corrections piece meal, I guess, even though the discussion actually discusses this matter. --Fcsuper (talk) 03:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I've removed POV tone of the first paragraph in three edits. This more resembles what it used (yes, this intro used to be in much better shape). I'll hold off on removing the redundant paragraphs for a day or so. I'll also add a comment to the current discuss addressing this effort. --Fcsuper (talk) 03:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Created area for this discussion.--Fcsuper (talk) 04:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Template editing

Hi! Thanks for your edits... when you edit templates such as {{db-empty}} that can appear on many pages, please be extra careful of introducing errors. Thanks! --Storkk (talk) 16:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Never mind... i misread your talk page header, thought you might be new & need a helpful tip. Cheers, --Storkk (talk) 17:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That having been said, is there any reason not to go back to the {{#switch:}}'ed version here? Did Pegasus edit {{db-empty}} by mistake instead of {{db-a3}} ? Cheers again, Storkk (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes there is. That version didn't work as expected on actual pages. When transcluded, it showed only gibberish. Thanks for correcting my typo. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 23:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

DA!

Hello,

I believe that DA! merit a place on Wikipedia simply for the utterly unprecedented, orginal, and innovative art-work and projects which they have both created and facilitated in Central London, UK.

DA! have appeared in a July 2006 issue of the Evening Standard newspaper, as Well as talking on BBC Radio (in the same time period.

You might want to take a look at Wikipedia's notability guidelines. That a project is innovative is not enough as a criterion for inclusion if the public at large has hardly ever heard about it. As the article currently stands, it asserts no notability whatsoever for the project. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 16:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Jollay homeless

Please make sure to use the correct speedy deletion tag on articles. The article Jollay homeless was not patent nonsense or gibberish [2] as we use those terms on Wikipedia. Rather, it was a report about some guy named Chris Jollay who lost a baseball bet and had to live on the streets for a week. That seems non-notable to me, but it is coherent enough to figure out what the article was about. (See [3] for confirmation of the article.) There may be a difference to some editors between being told that their article was incomprehensible as compared to being told that the subject of their article was not notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

For some reason, in the end, the deletion rationale was blatant advertizing. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 17:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

bible talk

You must not have read my edit summary. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

CSD for User:Cooperpeterj

I have removed the CSD tag you placed on this page because, frankly, almost every user page on Wikipedia is self-promoting to some extent or other. Instead of proposing the page for deletion, it would be much better to take the time to post a written message on the talk page of the user, welcoming him (perhaps with the {{subst:welcomenpov}} template). Of course, that might mean you can't use Huggle to communicate. Please go back and read WP:BITE. Thank you. Risker (talk) 19:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Ollabelle

I don't know if Ollabelle is a good candidate for speedy deletion. They have 3K listeners on last.fm. Is there a more lengthy process that is better suited for this? Also, see the 13 Wikipedia pages already mentioning them. --AlanH (talk) 02:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll bring it to a wider hearing. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

If HxD doesn't meet notability guidelines, then it may be deleted. Being bold is what matters. Thanks for letting me know. :-) Dragon 280 (talk) 03:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a proposed deletion, so it will be at least five days before the article gets deleted. If, in the mean time, you can show that HxD does meet our notability guidelines (which, for software, are not cast in concrete), then feel free to edit the article accordingly and remove the deletion tag. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:14, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Catholic Democrats

I gave it a pretty thorough working over. Please comment on whether it has gotten out of POV-land. DavidOaks (talk) 03:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Good work. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

HxD reviewed and available for download on PC World

http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file/fid,70898-order,1-page,1/description.html HxD is reviewed here and can be downloaded here. Since the software is distributed through an online magazine independent of Maël Hörz's website, it meets critera 3 of WP:WEB. Dragon 280 (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

As I said... just put something to that effect in the article, and remove the prod tag, and you have nothing to worry about. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Can't edit HxD - technical limitations

Due to technical limitations, I cannot, at this time, edit an article or section with more than about 250 characters in wiki markup. Dragon 280 (talk) 13:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I did it the way you wanted, but the reference is there to show the subject's notability. This is the first time I've ever heard of a Wikipedia user being limited by this kind of technical problem. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 22:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Modest Barnstar
		You helped me (and the community) get a small, but important job done! Dragon 280 (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Birds International - Speedy Deletion - Contest

Hello there! I have already posted this on the discussion page of the article; but since I had previously asked for a "whole week" I thought you might not take a look there until then, so I post it here too:

"While some other secondary resources that can be cited remain the article is mostly finished. I'm just planning to add a table including a list of the species Birds International breed and some more about their affiliations.

I believe that the company is notable; because:

1. There are several secondary resources that refer to it. 2. It is "the largest captive bird breeding facility in the world also regarded by many to be the best" and is "reputed to have the largest parrot collection in the world" (Intro). 3. It has done a good job of conserving endangered species, especially one of the most endangered birds Spix's Macaw (Birds Bred). 4. It is a succesful venture shown as a model by both private enterpreneurs and public authorities (Commercial Activities). 5. It is registered under CITES being one of the two organisation from Philippines and the sole organisation for two distinct species that has been registered (Relations with CITES). 6. It is affiliated to several organisations working in the fields of aviculture, zoology and environment (Others).

Furthermore Wikipedia's coverage of aviculture needs to be expanded."

Best regards. Evren Güldoğan (talk) 01:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Alex Sallons deletion

Really, I didn't think that it could be deleted per G3, so I put it as a prod just incase. I shall have to remember that for the future. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 00:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ollabelle

I found a handful of sources. Might want to check them out. Ten Pound Hammer Farfel and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps)} 03:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

FYI

You are mentioned here Slrubenstein | Talk 10:14, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I already knew, and I will rest my case. Thanks anyway. :-) --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 13:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

HG?

I'm a newbie - so excuse my ignorance - why did you delete the external link I had posted to Acquapendente? did you take the time to check it out? Just some useful and interesting facts about Acquapendente - No vandalism - including, but not limited to, several VR panoramas. Just thinking, if it isn't worth mentioning, then why keep those other links "Sagra della Fregiaccia" and "Tourism Page (in Italian)" anyway? Sounds odd IMHO. Just a thought. Andrea Caelisoft (talk) 23:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Basically, when on vandalism patrol, we must make split-second decisions, which, by default, should be "keep the change alone." But your edit was suspicious for two reasons: (1) the link you inserted was put at the top of the list of external links (per WP:SPAM, an action to be avoided under most circumstances, merely because it increases chances that your edit will be reverted), and (2) your link was much more detailled than what was already in there.

I took a look at the site, and it looks okay to me. If your link does not duplicate the information from the links already inserted, then feel free to reinsert it, but please take into account the considerations above, or someone else might revert your edit again. I suggest you put your site at the bottom of the list.

HG stands for Huggle, an automated revert-and-warn vandalism tool I was using when I reverted your edit. -- Blanchardb  -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thank you :) Caelisoft (talk) 10:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Why?

Hi, there. I am wondering why this page that I created, Caroline Schlossberg (disambiguation), is up for deletion? There's certainly nothing wrong with it. All I did was created a reference page that leads to Mrs. Caroline B. Schlossberg's Wiki page, Caroline Kennedy. She is a married woman and her surname is Schlossberg. If someone should happen to be on the disambiguation page titled "Caroline Schlossberg", they can click on "Caroline Kennedy" to go to Mrs. Schlossberg's page.

--AntiNWO23 (talk) 01:36, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

And I converted that page to a redirect. When you reverted that redirect, that means there is another notable Caroline Schlossberg. And I don't see a Wikipedia page about a Caroline Schlossberg who is not Caroline Kennedy, therefore you should restore my initial edit. -- Blanchardb  -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

There isn't even one "Caroline Schlossberg". Ms. Kennedy kept her own name when she got married. Look at her last name on her books, her recent NY Times article, and the interviews she's given in which she states that she's kept her own name. There are links on her page and her talk page. Ariadne55 (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

And that is exactly why a disambiguation page should not exist. I converted it to a redirect, which is what it should have been from the beginning. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 19:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

You went pretty soft on me

You were pretty soft on me about my 2 inappropriate pages. Most would have deleted my page by now. Are you a woman (pardon for asking. And no offence if you're not)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asafoetidda (talk • contribs) 07:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Rivière des Mille Îles

Regarding this edit A temporary change of format caused this to appear "Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_crossings_of_the_Rivi%C3%A8re_des_Mille_%C3%8Eles&action=edit&section=2 or something like it. This was an unsuccessful attempt to got rid of this. So I reversed that edit. Peter Horn 20:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Common era

Hello, you have undone my edit on the Common era page. I will explain myself; traditionally BC and AD were used to denominate the two major eras of human history. BC and AD were separated by the birth of Christ. Even those who don't recognize any divinity, or possibly even the existence of Christ, still traditionally used BC and AD. Now, if we were to have used BCE and CE in the past and never implemented BC and AD, what event would separate the two different eras (BCE and CE)? That is the reason for my addition to the Common era page. Thank you, Anonymous (talk) 01:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The reason why I reverted your edit is that, the way you worded it, it will be regarded as an attempt to convert people to Christianity. While I certainly do not oppose this goal, I do oppose the means. Your wording is better used in chat rooms and debate boards, but in the article I would mention a correspondence between "CE" and "AD" and make it as explicit as possible.

Additionally, your entry is the only unsourced one in a list where arguments need to be sourced to show that they do not constitute original research. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

a shiny

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is your last warning. The next time you file a good report to AIV, Special:BlockIP will break and I will get carpel tunnel. :-) Excellent, excellent work! J.delanoygabsadds 02:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scooby Doo: The Beginning

A bunch of sources just turned up. You might want to reconsider your !vote in this afd. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 00:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Dark Hamsters

Why was my article about Dark Hamsters deleted? TheSickBehemoth (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)TheSickBehemoth

Your talk page said it: the article did not assert why the band was worthy of an encyclopedia article. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV suggested

User:75.72.69.66 should get AIV. This user has repeated vandalized pages. Dragon 280 (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Pierre Le Gardeur Railway Bridge

Is N.O.T. NOT the same thing as the Pierre Le Gardeur Bridge Unless the railway bridge is known by another name, I shall have to reverse this redirect.

See also List of crossings of the Rivière des Prairies. You created a lot of work here. Copy and paste of a message I left on User talk:JForget Peter Horn 22:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Pierre Le Gardeur Bridge

Peter Horn 23:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I knew that (after all, it is from Google Earth that I got the coords), but since JForget (talk · contribs) chose to put both bridges in the same article, I did it this way to facilitate navigation. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

3RR and Zulu Papa

Thank you, I shall. Longchenpa (talk) 01:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. The title was misleading since Zulu Papa is not a mod. The section was posted before she made her 3RR complaint. Basically, our friend here made a series of changes before I got online today, posted a proactive alert, and then tried to use 3RR to block me from editing the page. Longchenpa (talk) 04:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Macaroni soup and a (somewhat different) AfC-related request

Hello! Thanks for letting me know about the AfD (and also I gotta say it was good of you the way you handled the PROD situation). I have a little request as well, a little off topic. I notice that you speak french (hurrah!) - there's a (presumable french) user who keeps trying to submit french-language content to WP:AfC, and editing old submissions after they've been closed. I've tried communicating, but it seems that they don't speak english. Is there any chance you'd be able to drop them a line telling them to a) list their article title at requested articles or b) try the French Wikipedia. I basically said that in a message in english. The user is Sopisopi, and the article in question is located here. - Toon⁰⁵ 01:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, merçi. My french is restricted to some very early schooldays stuff, mostly forgotten. Hopefully that'll take care of it! - Toon⁰⁵ 01:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

3RR guidance

Hi,

Can you give me better guidance on my 3RR claim? It was my first time. My understanding is that,

"An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time."

I had counted 7 actions, among different material, after I had given sufficient warning to stop.

Thanks, Zulu Papa 5 (talk) 01:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

First, you should know that while you counted this as four reverts, it is actually one revert done in four steps (and a third-party edit in-between). There lies the failure of your report, since there hasn't been a violation to begin with. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok I hear you on that, so things would have had to escalated to revert, and be re-reverted, right? What a pain, when someone ignores you. Thanks for the feedback. Zulu Papa 5 (talk) 02:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

James r kirk → James T. Kirk

Mind if I WP:BOLDly retarget this per the RFD? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 22:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Please take another look at

Macaroni soup. Thanks, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Lol I can't believe I spent hours finding out about a soup. Thanks for keeping it.:) Sticky Parkin 12:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

No, you:)

User:Mazca already gave me the Article Rescue Barnstar so I don't think I should get two for the same thing. But I liked the look of yours too so I had to be a devil and keep it. Thank you - I feel spoilt. :) Sticky Parkin 00:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

never mind

Obama's sisters page is gone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmcuker (talk • contribs) 00:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Harriet Howard

Hi, you are getting this message because you have the first username I saw at Category:User fr-N that looked vaguely familiar to me! It's just that English Wikipedia has a pretty good article on Harriet Howard, who made a significant contribution to French history when she funded Napoleon III of France's 1848 Presidential campaign, and yet the French Wikipedia doesn't have an article on her at all. I would bring it up at the French Wikipedia as a translation request, however my smattering of schoolboy French doesn't stretch much further than touristy things like ordering drinks and asking for directions. Would you be able to do that for me by any chance? -- role^player 00:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

hi, ok! thanks! --Freegris (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

sorry, now its ok. --Freegris (talk) 13:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)thanks

fr:Harriet Howard

WikiThanks

Merci beaucoup! C'est tres bien! -- role^player 15:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Todd Bachman

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Olympics attack on American nationals, you cite the "one event" policy. But as the CEO of a corporation recognized by the public, he was already notable before this event. (I'm really not in their market at all and yet I know what their logo and their ubiquitous purple trucks look like, because everybody does.) Michael Hardy (talk) 06:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

AFD notice

I have re-nominated this article for deletion. Please provide your input to the discussion. --Elliskev 17:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English

I think it's what's known as being too efficient! -- role^player 00:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

:-D -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

about tagging the rhiceracorn for vandalism

unfortunately, you dont have email up or something, so i cannot message you. but here's the thing, rhiceracorn is not meant to vandalize or harm the integrity of wikipedia. See, a friend and myself have had this legend going for quite some time. Now, we just want to put the story up on wikipedia for all those we know. I, however, didn't want to get the story wrong, so i started it and emailed my friend so he could go in and finish it. Its nothing scholarly, but I dont see how that means my article is vandalizing wikipedia! Feel free to email me at matthewbrandeburg@gmail.com with more information as to why you've made that choice, and what i can do to reverse it. Thanks for understanding.--MbAce1540 (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)Matthew Brandeburg

I'm sorry about using a vandalism tag on your article, but it fit the definition of blatant misinformaton: your theory was presented as truth, and there was no indication that you were writing an article about a hoax (such as Loch Ness Monster). You should look into a few policy pages, such as WP:MADEUP and WP:HOAX. Anyway, any constructive contribution is welcome. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Axis porcinus annamiticus

was wrong with the species name redirecting to the common name? Of course, i'd be the last one to look it up that way. Dlohcierekim 20:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Better ask the creator. :-)

Anyway the speedy criterion no longer applies. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 20:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

No prob. I was afraid there was something I'd missed. Then I figured it out later. Cheers, and thanks. Dlohcierekim 21:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Azerbaijan

Redirects will be done once the dabs and articles are made, since many of the redirects will need to be made into dabs. Stay tuned. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

NOLAcon

I noticed and fixed the self-redirect error in well under a minute. How did you notice it so quickly? Keith Lynch (talk) 20:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Recent Jw article edits

Blanchardb, there are some recent Jehovah's Witnesses edits. I am a bit overwelmed by the level of POV editing, and would like to ask you to evaluate what I've done and see if any further action is necessary. Thanks! — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 15:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Good job. The article still needs work. Too many sources are from the Watchtower Society. The previous editor apparently believed anything about the JW's that doesn't come from the Watchtower Society is inherently unreliable when talking about the JW's. I have a book by Charles Trombley in which he recounts how he broke with the Jehovah's Witnesses after his newborn daughter was miraculously healed from a severe congenital defect, something he was told could only be the work of Satan. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

question

Why exactly do you consider the Herpaflor Wikipedia page spam? Valtrex has a Wikipedia page. The only difference between the Valtrex page and the Herpaflor page is that Valtrex is a pharmaceutical product and Herpaflor is a nutraceutical one--and the fact that there's actually a LINK to Valtrex on their Wikipedia page. The information provided on the Herpaflor Wikipedia page is in the same format as the information provided on the Valtrex page and does not offer anything but a true definition/explanation of what the product is, so it's indeed encyclopedic. There are no links, only a description of the product and its ingredients. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylan Morris624 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you come up with a valid argument for keeping the article? I mean, one where you make no mention of Valtrex? See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 22:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

todd bachman

hi blanchardb- i havent edited in a while, so i guess ive fallen behind on the rules. im fairly sure todd bachman is notable (search his name in google news)...PS im not a vandal...Benji64 (talk) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

sure

I am new to the site, so am still learning how to navigate. But, I made definite effort to be objective in my description of the product. There is no sales pitch included at all in the Herpaflor entry. There are no claims included in the entry--whether provable or not. Everything included in the entry is verifiable and based on research--with those links included as references. There are no links to a site selling this product. The product is a nutraceutical product on the market for herpes treatment and that is pretty much what the Wikipedia entry says. If there is information that you consider to be unverifiable or salesy, I can edit it, but to delete a page on the mere basis that it is not a pharmaceutical product, when the term "nutraceutical" is a Wikipedia entry, and this product is an example of it. I do not see any part of the entry that intended to promote the use of the product. Is simply defining a product and its nature on Wikipedia considered "promoting" it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylan Morris624 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that your references do not appear on the page. I just tried to add the {{reflist}} template that would have made them visible, but my edit was blocked because it would have shown a link to autoimmunedisease.suite101.com, which is on Wikipedia's spam blacklist. To make your references acceptable, your first step would be to request a delisting of this URL at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed removals. Make sure your rationale is compelling. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 22:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

thank you

(I'm sure there's a way to just respond to the same thread, but I've no idea, so sorry for creating all of these new sections) Thank you for letting me know that, again, as I'm new I wasn't aware of that, but I will edit the entry. Was that the only problem with the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylan Morris624 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

no problem

Apparently, it is the consensus of the users regardless of the fact that the information isn't salesy to delete it. How do I delete the entry, so that I can move forward with a rewrite? Dylan Morris624 (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Before you take any action, you should ask yourself one question: is this product already notorious enough to warrant an encyclopedia article? Because if your intent is to use Wikipedia to build the product's notoriety when it has too little of it, the article will get deleted no matter what, even if it is a masterpiece of prose. See Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

But if you are confident that the product passes on notability guidelines, you can go ahead and just remove the text. If your removal is reverted by a bot, just do it again, and the bot will leave you alone this time. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 18:18, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Polish Gibberish

No problem - since it's nonsense in Polish, it's nonsense, so I deleted under G1. The Nonsense criteria gets overused a bit, esp. when articles aren't in English, but you were proper in proposing deletion once it was translated and reviewed. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 23:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

XPanel

No objection to you subsituting my PROD with an AfD, but I'm puzzled by your reasoning: "you cannot prod a recreated article". I agree there are various cases where you cannot PROD an article but I know of no rule that says that an article previously speedied cannot be nominated in this way. Can you elaborate? Thx! Ros0709 (talk) 19:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Our notes crossed. I see your reasoning. I have !voted at the AfD. Ros0709 (talk) 19:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of David Nowlin

An article that you have been involved in editing, David Nowlin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Nowlin. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Movingboxes (talk) 10:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Notability of User talk:Vikingofmetal

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on User talk:Vikingofmetal, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because User talk:Vikingofmetal seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting User talk:Vikingofmetal, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Electro Homeopathy

I've done some work on this page with is currently an AfD. Nonsense though the science behind the topic almost certainly is, it does have some interesting history and might be saveable. Have a look at the rewrked page and see if you think there's the basis for an article there. thanks Brammarb (talk) 20:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Energiie

Hello. Just wanted to let you know that I moved my block notice back under the month heading on User talk:Energiie as per WP:UW. If the editor had been blocked for a 3RR violation I would be fine with leaving the notice where you had moved it, however since Energiie was blocked via an WP:AIV report, it seams appropriate to put the block message under the rest of the warnings. --Kralizec! (talk) 14:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Hywel Fychan

As the person responsible for having this article deleted, could you please let us know which of the two notable people by that name was intended? Was it the 14th century one who is linked from Dafydd Gam, or was it the 9th century one who may be the same as Hywel ap Rhodri Molwynog. The 9th century person appears in the Dictionary of National Biography as "Howel Vychan". The boilerplate in the notice to the contributor is not helpful. Eclecticology (talk) 01:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The deletion log states that this article was deleted almost 6 months ago. Since I do not have administrator privilege, I do not have access to it, and my memory of deleted articles does not go back that far. The right person to ask would be the administrator who performed the actual deletion, that is, Alexf (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Islam as TFA

Just FYI, you can't add a sixth article to the page. I've left a note there. You either have to remove the sole three point article, set for the eleventh, or else remove yours and wait. And if I can suggest, why not wait? Five points will trump almost everything on the page, and you don't really need to occupy a spot for four weeks. Just a suggestion.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, Islam has already appeared on the mainpage. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Never thought to look.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Institutional memory :-) Blanchardb, please see the instructions at WP:TFA/R, under Adding requests. Requests must not have already appeared. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I did. Just looked in the wrong place to see whether it had already been featured, that's all. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:46, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Prod warnings

Please do not issue warnings to users who have only done maintenance tagging as I have done on Anthony thomas candy co. Canis Lupus 03:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

PNT

Bonjour de nouveau, Blanchardb. Pouvez-vous traduire Egyptian clothing? Nous devons éliminer le «backlog» à PNT, mais mon niveau de français ne suffit pas. BalkanFever^{not a fan? say so!} 10:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Switchboard as a service aka GoHello

FYI I have nominated this article for deletion. samj (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The Grave Thief

Looks like we were both trying to delete this at the same time. The text indicates it's taken from another website, so, if you don't mind, I'm going to remove your PROD and change my speedy to a copyvio. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Perfect.-- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 19:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Mawe mbili

Thank you... --Godshat (talk) 14:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedying prodded articles

Are you sure? Some time ago, I speedy-tagged an article with a prod and left the prod, and another admin told me to remove the speedy. Which is it? (BTW, I have that article on watchlist, so if the speedy is declined we can restore the prod quickly.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, man, that's been way more than a year ago, maybe even two. It's when I first started on new-page patrol. I'd have to dig through archives. But I don't really care, as I am more than willing to abide by the guideline, as long as I know what it is. No bug deal to me, and probably easier this way since I don't have to delete the prod first. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

On Patrol

Stop beating me to tagging newpages with csd templates. Just kidding great work with newpages :D. RockManQ (talk) 19:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Reverts

Excuse me. Why are you reverting my edits to {{martha stewart}}. You accused me of vandalism, but I do not understand which policy I violated 68.160.180.247 (talk) 00:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, good job you're doing here. :-) You are too fast for me; nothing left to do... ;-) --88.130.93.23 (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Im Sister Ray Pr, why The Outsets article is being considered for deletion? Let me know thanks!--Sister Ray Pr (talk) 23:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The Outsets Help

hello where can I read what is wrong with the pages: The Outsets Ivan Julian

so I corrected them or get help?!

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!

(Sister Ray) —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC).

Higgins Chamberlin Inc.

I didnt realize my article had to be important to you. Its important to me and the people at HCI. Who have been leaders in business innovation for quite some time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SensualKisses (talk • contribs) 23:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion for Subtropical Storm Laura

I tagged the article with speedy deletion because it only had two sentences. This does not meet the requirements for Wikipedia articles. This decision was made at the time, but may not reflect the current status of the article. Questions or comments, please respond on my talk page. (Hurricaneguy (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC))

• The article was two sentences at the time, I do not think that is a valid encyclopedia article. (Hurricaneguy (talk) 22:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC))

Listen here, quit bein a jerk. Why would you go and delete my article? We all know wikipedia is a joke. It's not a credible source and you can't even use it when you're writing a paper. So stop taking it so seriously. I was just having a little bit of fun with a friend and you had to go and try to ruin it. I would appreciate it if you would bother someone else. Thanks bud ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwainwright09 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

Well I read the bible all the Time! what bit is your favourite! Chogglershouseparty (talk) 20:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Tim Harlan-Marks

Why have you deleted this page twice in a row? He is an actor in a new movie and I was trying to provide a little background on him. What is wrong with this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenn0334 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Pen

Thanks for the correction. I have removed the interwiki link from vi:Pen. --Jacob.jose (talk) 04:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! There are still incorrect links pointing to vi:Pen from other languages, but SilvonenBot is now removing them. --Silvonen (talk) 03:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

sellout comedy tour

???? I guess you wanted to delete the page for the Blue Collar Comedy tour also huh? I'll check and see IF your request is on that page. I'm guessing that it's NOT there.

Thanks for the 'warm' welcome to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LouisJohnson (talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Swelter

Hi Blanchardb. Just to let you know, I declined the speedy tagging of this article because I thought that there was some suggestion of notability, with at least one source mentioned in the article, and an Allmusic listing noted on the talk page. It might be one for AfD, however, if more extensive sourcing is not offered. Best wishes, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

No, I won't bother with an AfD on this one. It is already tagged appropriately. Thanks. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

...of course

...well...i checked...and NO you didnt request a speedy deletion of Blue Collar Comedy Tour or Comedians of Comedy. Just as I expected. LouisJohnson (talk) 08:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

not english

Thanks for the clarification, and happy editing to you. :) -FlyingToaster (talk) 00:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Blanch!

For removing this piece of vandalism before i even got a chance to look at the diff. :) Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 14:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Summerville Elementary School

Why do you want it deleted? Reliableforever (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Because the school does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you want me to delete it myself? Reliableforever (talk) 15:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

You can't. But you can replace the entire contents with {{db-author}}, and an administrator will delete it. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

OEIS

OEIS is managed/edited by renowned scientist - Neal Sloane, therefore OEIS reference is a Reliable Source ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apovolot (talk • contribs) 15:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

The right place to make this statement is in the deletion discussion. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)