User talk:Courcelles/Archive 96

Archive 90

←

Archive 94

Archive 95

Archive 96

Archive 97

Archive 98

→

Archive 100

Adele

[1] Was this the interface or something else? Gimmetoo (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

• I think it lagged like crazy or something. (It took several minutes to appear to "take" on my end, and timed out once.) I notice the last guy to protect this article has the same problem, just to a lesser degree! Courcelles 21:02, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

It's just a quick question. - JuneGloom Talk 01:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

• Replied. Courcelles 01:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Adjamski

Greetings; refer your indef block of this user: given the time frame of the edits posted and warnings given, do you think that this block is a little harsh? Obviously, if you see something that I do not I will bow to your judgement on the issue. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I just came here to say pretty much the same thing. I am strongly inclined to overturn this block, as it seems unduly harsh for a user with a total of 7 edits, none of which appear to be outright vandalism. I realize this is a sensitive area with a lot of POV pushers around, but on the surface it appears this user has gotten the WP:BITE and that another user was attempting to discuss things with them when literally one minute later you blocked them indefinitely. If there is more to the story than is evident it would be helpful if you could let us in on it. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

FOr the record, my block was one minute before the discussion on the user page, it just took a couple minutes for me to reconnect and get the block template delivered. Really, I'm convinced this account is a sockpuppet, but the checkuserdata of the account's creation are long stale, so I can't verify that, but literally nothing about an account with two edits dormant for a year and a half and then jumping into the single most contentious topic area on WP; all my instincts tell me this was a sleeper sock, and the edits are pure disruption to boot. Courcelles 05:34, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I think his edit are consistent with new editors' behavior anyhow I think per WP:ROPE and WP:AGF another chance should be given--Shrike (talk) 08:47, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The suspicion of socking may in fact be correct, but in the absence of any credible evidence to back that up a block is not justified. "Suspected sockpuppet of somebody maybe" is simply not enough to warrant an indefinite block. Again, you may be right, but I am going to unblock this user as there is insufficient evidence to support such a claim and the few edits they have made are not bad enough on their own to justify an indefinite block. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I beg to differ, and consider the edits he made fully worthy of an indef block as a disruption-only account,and the odds of this being a new account less than one in 50. (For reasons that should not be discussed on-wiki, CU on this account was rather worthless, far more so here than other accounts with the same editing history) I'm surprised you didn't at least formally warn them of ARBPIA when unblocking, as his edits were exactly the type of nonsense those discretionary sanctions were designed to stop "new" editors from doing. Courcelles

I told him about ARBPIA when unblocking. If you'd like to make a more formal mention of it be my guest. I also advised them that, sock or not, continuing to edit in such a fashion would get them blocked again. What I didn't do was jump to what you readily admit is a likely but completely unsubstantiated conclusion based on an assumption of bad faith. It's also pssible that they are just another opinionated person who didn't realize they can't just waltz in here and start adding their own opinions and observations to articles. We don't know which it is, so we should take the account's contribs on their own merits. If you believe their contribs alone merit an indef block then we apparently have a slight difference of opinion on the level of disruption that merits an no-warning indef block. You are welcome to ask for a wider review of this if it still troubles you. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Congrats.

Looks like you got the most support. Congrats on your appointment. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!}

Logan likes this. 21:34, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Told you so! (Grats.) sonia♫ 21:37, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

2 —GFOLEY FOUR!— 21:38, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Dana boomer (talk) 21:41, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your appointment! Pretty sweet to be at the top of the list. :) --Dianna (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, well deserved. --WGFinley (talk) 21:49, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the team! Jclemens (talk) 22:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your election to the Committee! I'm looking forward to working along side you for the next few years. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:23, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Commiserations. --GraemeL ^(talk) 22:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations, and good luck. DCItalk 22:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Well done. Now the drama buck stops with you. —Tom Morris (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Nice one!--5 albert square (talk) 23:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations Courcelles. You did quite well and I'm very thankful you'll be on ArbCom helping out as I can think of very few who are as just and honorable as you. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 23:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Nice to see that you got the most votes --Guerillero | My Talk 00:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! As I said yesterday, it's too late to back out now; you're stuck with this job for the next two years! ;-) Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 01:22, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Whooo-hoooo! You fully deserved to be right at the top of the list :o) Pesky (talk …stalk!) 06:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Have fun ;) un☯mi 09:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all. I was rather shocked at the results; as Kirill could testify from dinner Saturday night, this was not at all what I expected. Thank you, all. Courcelles 20:10, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

recent close

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kiss_of_the_Gypsy

i edit-conflicted with the below comment :( anything to do here? i'm not majorly invested either way.

• Keep I'm inclined to keep. They have a descriptive entry in the Encyclopedia of Popular Music, an early edition of which had them "widely regarded as being one of the most promising British outfits to emerge since Def Leppard." They have an interesting Allmusic writeup [2]. They have a dismissive but significant review in a major newspaper [3]. Rockdetector says they recieved "a fair amount of press acclaim" [4] and it seems more than likely there is more 1992 coverage than is digitised online. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 00:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
  • No harm in letting this run another week; I've relisted the debate, please feel free to add to it. Courcelles 00:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

thx, will do. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 00:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

• News and notes: Anti-piracy act has Wikimedians on the defensive, WMF annual report released, and Indic language dynamics

• In the news: To save the wiki: strike first, then makeover?

• Discussion report: Polls, templates, and other December discussions

• WikiProject report: A dalliance with the dismal scientists of WikiProject Economics

• Featured content: Panoramas with Farwestern and a good week for featured content

• Arbitration report: The community elects eight arbitrators

• Technology report: Visual editor demo launched, hailed as "most important change to our user experience ... ever"; but elsewhere over-hasty deployments criticised

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:41, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Awards

I'm not so worried about creating an article for a list of 30 odd award nominations after seeing this - List of accolades received by Wild at Heart. Congrats on being elected to the Committee. :) - JuneGloom Talk 20:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

• Well... that article should clearly be merged back into the main one. And thank you. Courcelles 20:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

What makes me laugh is both the prose and the infobox are bigger than the awards table. If you're not busy, could you move User:JuneGloom07/Joanna to Joanna Evans? The article was a single line stub, before it was merged following an AfD last year. I've expanded the article, adding sourced info, so it is significantly different from the original. I was going to ask the admin who closed the AfD if I could recreate the article, but he hasn't been active for a month or so. - JuneGloom Talk 22:48, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

You are a star, thank you! :) - JuneGloom Talk 22:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry to be a pain. Could you move the article to Joanna Hartman? It's her WP:COMMONAME. - JuneGloom Talk 23:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. Courcelles 22:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. - JuneGloom Talk 23:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your work on the Priya Cooper article! It is the first Australian paralympic article to reach good status.

Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks :) Courcelles 22:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Fred Onovwerosuoke

Hi. You made an Article for creation page, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Fred Onovwerosuoke (2010-03-23), but it was never actually submitted for a review.

I have submitted it just now, so you should get feedback soon. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  06:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

• Um... I didn't write that... Courcelles 22:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Have a great Christmas

	Christmas pudding is hot stuff!
	Have a wonderful Christmas. As the song says: "I wish you a hopeful Christmas, I wish you a brave new year; All anguish, pain, and sadness Leave your heart and let your road be clear." Pesky (talk …stalk!) 22:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks, Pesky. Merry Christmas to you and yours. Courcelles 01:07, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry X'mas~!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®}is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

• Thanks. Same to you. Courcelles 04:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

• And to yours :) Courcelles 04:25, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

No fancy big bannery wikilove from me, but have a good holiday season. sonia♫ 04:38, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Fred Onovwerosuoke, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
• You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.
• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the Help desk or on the reviewer's talk page
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

   Thorncrag  20:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

• Still have no idea why I'm getting messages about this, but... whatever. I didn't write that. Courcelles 20:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It looks like you salvaged an article you found in the sandbox some time ago and submitted it to AfC. So, here we are with a new article for Wikipedia :-)    Thorncrag  20:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy holidays

		Happy holidays.
		Best wishes for joy and happiness. Hope you have a great one! Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 00:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• I hope you had a very merry Christmas, and a happy New Year! Courcelles 04:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

• Opinion essay: Openness versus quality: why we're doing it wrong, and how to fix it

• Recent research: Psychiatrists: Wikipedia better than Britannica; spell-checking Wikipedia; Wikipedians smart but fun; structured biological data

• News and notes: Fundraiser passes 2010 watermark, brief news

• WikiProject report: The Tree of Life

• Featured content: Going through the roster with Killervogel5 and a plethora of featured content

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, one set for acceptance, arbitrators formally appointed by Jimmy Wales

• Technology report: Wikimedia in Go Daddy boycott, and why you should 'Join the Swarm'

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Doncram/Sarek blocks

Can you document in more detail what happened here? Preferably on ANI for open review?

The six months seems extreme for Doncram, even given his history, given that it was only fighting over a relatively small set of stuff on one brand new article.

Sarek certainly gets no pass for 6RR on account of being an admin, but 1 week and then 3 weeks without evident public situational change seems extreme as well. 6RR without serious prior abuse history is usually a 24 to 48 hr time-out...

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Doncram I just about indeffed, as he has been before AN for misconduct several times now, and has had a three-month block that didn't get through his head that his ways needed to change quickly. He is a habitual edit warrior, and nothing seems to get him to stop the disruption. After blocking him for a week, Sarek actually e-mailed me and asked for a longer block; between two weeks and one month. And at this point, given Sarek was blocked before for edit warring with Doncram, it is a serial problem, and a 24 hour block would have been exceedingly lenient. Courcelles 00:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I think nothing short of nuclear ordnance will get through to Doncram. He doesn't create or edit articles, he downloads into mainspace, leaving others to clear up the mess, and he thinks it is acceptable to create an encyclopaedia in this manner.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

My gut says you're likely right, Elen, and I would have no issues with another admin making Doncram's block an indef. Courcelles 01:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Count me as one of the people who is frustrated about Doncram. A six-month block is (unfortunately) a proportionate response. It's hard to think of anything that might get through to him. Maybe he could be persuaded to work at Commons for a while. The following is a list of 22 admin noticeboard discussions where Doncram's name has been mentioned:

The only advantage I can see in trying an indef is that it might stimulate an unblock discussion in which some concessions could be made. But him adhering to concessions is not a likely prospect. — EdJohnston (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

RevDelete request

[5] per WP:CRD#2. —Yk Yk Yk  talk ~ contrib 07:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Gone. Courcelles 07:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

What do you think

...of List of accolades received by My Week with Marilyn? A future FL in the making? - JuneGloom Talk 23:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• It has potential, though the list is a bit smaller than I would have thought these should have been, but recent FLC's have made me evaluate anew what the FLC reviewers are looking for in these as it relates to criterion 3B... Courcelles 06:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Lowe (2nd nomination)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Lowe (2nd nomination) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:56, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

• G7'ed, and you could have easily G6'ed it as uncontroversial and saved everyone some time. Courcelles 21:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Friendly notification regarding this week's Signpost

Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you will shortly be mentioned in this week's 'Arbitration Report' (link). The report aims to inform The Signpost's many readers about the activities of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them in the Comments section directly below the main body of text, where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section), as well as refraining from edit-warring or other uncivil behaviour on project pages generally. Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Need help

I have something urgently needing to be addressed but would prefer through email. Is this okay? Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

• Send it, and I'll take a look... Courcelles 02:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

  I don't have your email though. Mind sending me an email so your info won't be shared? Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

  Just hit the "E-mail this user" button on your left. Courcelles 02:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion old file revisions

This thread might be of interested to you: User_talk:Sphilbrick#Something_to_watch_for. Maxim_(talk) 03:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

• I know of this bug, and have been having to fix two or three for every two hundred files I've ran in this process. Courcelles 03:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

• Interview: The Gardner interview

• News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

• WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

• Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

• Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Protection of Wendy Starland

Someone asked about it on Talk:Wendy Starland. According to logs, I think you were the last admin to change those settings. DMacks (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

• This is really PMDrive's ball o' wax, my only involvement was turning off the (very, very excessive) full protection he tried to place on that article. The current indef semi is part of the ArbCom motion that ended PC in the middle of last year, I believe, but I don't remember much about this. Might be worth e-mailing PMDrive, as he claimed to be in contact with the article's subject. Courcelles 19:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Alternative

Regarding [6]. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand_3/Workshop#.CE.94_restricted. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Interesting to note, though as proposed it is harsh enough to almost be akin to a ban... Courcelles 04:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Less harsh (but probably more complex) proposals have been made at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_79#Altering_the_editing_restriction_.231_imposed_on_.CE.94_.28Betacommand.29. You might be able to find something useful in there. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 06:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

File:GriffithBerserk.PNG

Could you restore the page File:GriffithBerserk.PNG as it was orphaned due to an improper redirect that had no discussion before it was done, and now the page is back to normal. This is actually the second time the article has been improperly redirected and it has been necessary to restore the image. --AndrewTJ31 (talk) 16:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

• Done, though it would not surprise me greatly to see a formal WP:AFD opened on this article on notability grounds... 16:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Ottotiv

Was that Ottova? Him and I have argued on IRC a couple of times. Also, since you have oversight could you check the ANI thread about Epstein and decide whether the first IP on the article talk page who decided he was a child porn loving human trafficker needs oversighting? Cheers, Egg Centric 23:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, socks. I'm not seeing anything quite requiring OS, but for future reference, never request that on-wiki, please. Courcelles 23:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I want to be clear about this (and sorry if this looks like a moronic restatement of what you just said - that's what I hope it is - it's just so different from what I thought I ought to be doing I want to be totally clear) are you saying if I think something should be oversighted I should communicate that to oversighters off-wiki? Egg Centric 23:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, requests for oversight should always be made off-wiki. Courcelles 00:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Cheers Courcelles, understood Egg Centric 00:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hi. Someone created a page about my brother-in-law David Grant on Wikipedia but you have deleted it and I just wondered if you could tell me why as I'm not sure of your reasons. All the info that was on the page was correct and there are plenty of references to him online if you look on sites such as MediaUK (http://www.mediauk.com/radio/174/real-radio-xs) or the free library (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/INCREDIBLE+SAGA+OF+DJ+ANNIE%27S+CHANGING+AGE%3B+I%27m+45,+she+said+-+but...-a0121319020) or the Evening Time (http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/dj-bans-ac-dc-from-rock-radio-for-scots-tour-snub-1.963813) or Bebo (http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=10054391567) or Classic Rock Magazine (http://www.classicrockmagazine.com/news/the_dirt/bnbnbn1/) and there are even references to him on other pages on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/96.3_Real_Radio_XS) so I really don't understand why you couldn't find any references to him online.

Unfortunately I didn't create the page so I don't have access to it to modify it so we're stuck. It's no big deal but it was quite nice seeing my brother-in-law on Wikipedia. If there are genuine reasons for you to delete it then fair enough but I really can't see any from the text you added

Many thanks,

Jono PS- Please could you put me in touch with whoever did create the original page? Thanks

• The deletion log merely points to the discussion that decided to delete the discussion, click on that link ]]Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Grant (broadcaster)\\ to view the discussion and rationale for deletion. If you have any questions after that, feel free to ask me. Courcelles 00:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I've looked at the discussion notes but they seem to say that you could not find any references to David on line. Please could you check the links I have copied across above as there are quite a few on line references to David. Please could you tell me how to get the page un-deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.90.201 (talk) 01:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Dylan Tombides

For [7], deleted by Courcelles on 12 November 2011. I would like to request that the Wikipedia article for "Dylan Tombides" be restored.

This is an Australian footballer who has played for the Joeys U17 National football team of Australia and has represented the country in the U17 world cup where he was a stand out. He holds a professional contract with the infamous London club West Ham united and has been stopped from breaking into the senior first team largely because of a highly publicised battle with testicular cancer which is regularly covered in Australian and even London based football news articles/magazines/websites/other media. He is regarded by many in the Australian football community as potentially the best talent the country has produced in a decade, and hence on related forums it's almost a daily occurrence that someone will complain that he does not have a Wikipedia article page.

There are team-mates from his U17 world cup squad who have done far less than him in their careers thus far and are virtually unheard of amongst the football community yet their wiki pages are allowed to exist while mods persist on removing any attempt at an article for Dylan Tombides. Example: [8].

Reliable source on Dylan Tombides basic information that I would use to reference in the recreation of the wiki page: http://www.whufc.com/articles/dylan-tombides-not-yet-known_2228487_55708 A Google news search will provide ample articles covering the players publicised ongoing battle with cancer and achievements with the U17 national team.

Information about Dylan Tombides is high in demand and therefore Wikipedia has the responsibility provide it (through us). I am happy to maintain the integrity of this article myself in order to meet Wikipedia standards if it is restored.

Cheers.

(talk page stalker) Dylan Tombides has never played a game of fully professional football only U17. --Guerillero | My Talk 05:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

• Technological roadmap: 2011's technological achievements in review, and what 2012 may hold

• News and notes: Fundraiser 2011 ends with a bang

• In the news: Wikipedia ends annual fundraising drive; Monmouthpedia launches

• WikiProject report: From Traditional to Experimental: WikiProject Jazz

• Featured content: Contentious FAC debate: a week in review

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Betacommand 3

• Technology report: December in more detail; and why the MediaWiki codebase was "slushed" this week

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

a request

You closed the deletion discussion Noorullah Noori and nine other Guantanamo captives. There may be something funny about your archive, User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_56#Your_assistance_please, as it only seems to contain part of our discussion over your closure.

I thought I had offered sufficient justification for the closing administrator to discount the uninformed comments of the nominator, and the "me too" comments of certain other individuals.

I pointed out, in the {{afd}}, and in our subsequent discussion, that Noorullah Noori was one of the most senior members of the Taliban, a former governor, and an individual important enough that the UN listed him as someone whose assets the UN's member states should freeze. You did not accept the United Nations or the US Federal Registry as reliable sources. You wrote: "Norullah Noori has a shot at passing POLITICIAN, if the claim of being governor of Balkh Province could be substantiated, but the sourcing is among the worst of the lot."

In the last week or so there has been some coverage of confidential negotiations between the USA and the Taliban that did not include the Hamid Karzai regime. One of the factors under discussion was that the remaining senior members of the Taliban still in Guantanamo would be transferred to Qatar.

A recent article asserts that Noorullah Noori and two other senior Taliban leaders were just transferred to Qatar.

• "US frees top Taliban leaders from Gitmo". Press TV. 2012-01-09. Retrieved 2012-01-10. According to media reports, the released prisoners include Mullah Khair Khowa, a former interior minister, Noorullah Noori, a former governor in northern Afghanistan and maybe Mullah Fazl Akhund, a Taliban Army Chief of Staff. mirror

I request you restore this article. Geo Swan (talk) 06:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

• okay, found the right link, the article is Norullah Noori.. Courcelles 00:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• And are you considering restoration?

  I frankly didn't understand your assertion "the sourcing is among the worst of the lot."

  The man was a Governor. A lack of confidence that his governorship had been established was the justification you offered for endorsing deletion.

  Was there some other justification you had for endorsing deletion that you didn't state last year? If so could you please state it now? Geo Swan (talk) 01:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• No, that was a notekeeping post so the next time I looked at this later tonight I wouldn't have to spend ten minutes finding the right link... Courcelles 01:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• Okay, I'll give you a week to focus on this man and the case to retain this article. Restored and procedurally re-nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norullah Noori. Courcelles 06:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)