User talk:Metropolitan90/Archive 21
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Metropolitan90. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |
My account got hacked. I had intended to leave your edit and also transfer it to the Chinese wiki. The page got screwed up recently, someone had removed all disambiguation links and ended up totally messing up the templates in the process. At the moment I'm trying to align and update the Chinese wiki with it. I will change it to English once I'm done. Thanks for your patience.
Cheers ~~Acsian88 (talk) 10:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for working on this. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:42, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The page was quite crap in the first place and so cluttered it that it was difficult for anyone to read. Anyway, I've changed most of the links to English. The other secondary pages linked from it are in English. I've left the 1980s section as it is. There's not much info in English about shows or actors from that era so I'm leaving it be. As for your "translation proposal", the Chinese titles are there for reference purposes. ~~Acsian88 20:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- I don't mind the Chinese titles as long as the English titles are adjacent to them. However, I don't think the casts should be listed in Chinese, especially for those actors who already have articles in the English Wikipedia (example: Huang Wenyong, the first actor listed for the first program, is listed as 黄文永), but for any of them. All these names can be transliterated into English using whatever the appropriate Chinese language romanisation in Singapore is. Similarly, many of the notes are in Chinese, and they need to be in English. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:24, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Channel 8 is MediaCorp's Chinese language channel. I would think most people who go this page know Chinese. Also this page was already like that (cast names & notes in Chinese) since last year and it was not tagged for translation and there was no complains. Pinyin-ising it causes a lot of confusion because 1 pinyin has many characters. Also you mentioned Chinese language romanisation in Singapore but it is not that easy. Each family has their own way of spelling so we cannot simply 'romanise' a name. -wiki user {{subst:Unsigned|203.28.150.125
- Sorry, I disagree. This is the English language Wikipedia and people should not be required to know Chinese to read the articles here. If people want to read the cast lists of these shows in Chinese, they should be put on the Chinese Wikipedia. I did not say that all the names should be put into Pinyin, I said that they should be put into the appropriate Chinese language romanisation, which may not necessarily be Pinyin. Since English is the official language of government in Singapore, I would expect that each actor would have a standard spelling for their name in roman characters, and that's what should appear in the table. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:14, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, You recently deleted the page Amit Arya. Could you let me know if it would be possible that the page stay with changes such as album releases and concert touring information?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mewati2012 (talk • contribs)
- No, I didn't delete it. I moved Wikipedia:Amit Arya to Amit Arya. Pages beginning with "Wikipedia:" are supposed to be for administration of the encyclopedia; regular biography pages don't have a prefix like that. As you can see by clicking on Amit Arya, the content of the page is still there at the appropriate page title. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Talkback - gwickwire
Message added 01:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by heather walls (talk) 03:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Category:Piirpauke albums
Category:Piirpauke albums, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:50, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry must have been misread the usernames or something I see you have already reverted the edit thanks.. --Fox2k11 (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Monovia
Since your a admin, can you bring the discussion to a close please? It's causing too much trouble, and I trust your descion. Libertasgov (talk) 18:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for your confidence; however, I would not be an appropriate person to close the deletion discussion, because I already expressed an opinion in the discussion. (See WP:INVOLVED.) I'm not sure what the best procedure to follow in this case would be, but you could try asking at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
I didn't realize Speedy Deletion didn't apply to written works and I also didn't realize what PROD was used for (regarding Betryal of 2). Just wanted to drop a line saying thanks for teaching me something new! Deflagro (talk) 04:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- No problem, glad to be of use. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
You deleted the userpage of User:For An Angel and also User:For An Angel/Wikipedia, apparently at the user's request. I think you should be aware of this discussion on User talk:Jimbo Wales. You may wish to restore those pages. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
- I will respond in the discussion at User talk:Jimbo Wales. In short, though, I will authorize any admin to restore the pages if doing so would be appropriate under Wikipedia policy and guidelines. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
The "I'll put you on the list" Award
|
The "I'll put you on the list" Award |
| Awarded for your robust and admirable response to threats of off-site harassment in retaliation for taking reasonable and justifiable administrator actions permitted by policy. This is one of a series of related awards; you are the first recipient of this particular one. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC) |
Girl Meets World (TV Series) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Girl Meets World (TV Series). Since you had some involvement with the Girl Meets World (TV Series) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). TJRC (talk) 02:41, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of musical medleys, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Palmer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Dennis Sharpe
Why was the speedy declined? Only possible claim to notability is "he is a boxer", which I didn't consider big at all. Buggie111 (talk) 04:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
- It was a judgment call, since at least I was able to confirm that he is a professional boxer. If you really believe this is a speedy delete, go ahead and renominate it for speedy deletion, and I'll let another admin make the call as to whether it deserves to be speedied. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
- It seems I just have a lower opinion about the notability of pro boxers than you do. It was previously A7'ed with almost identical content, but the Prod probably won't come off since the creator is blocked. Buggie111 (talk) 15:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
deletion request
I've figured out a better fix. I'll add Ohanian to the HI page & provide reference. (I was about to add a note to say "Never mind".) Thanks for your assistance.--S. Rich (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
The article Girl Meets World (TV Series) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Speculative article with no references, about an alleged upcoming series
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Elizium23 (talk) 23:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Deletion of Michelle Denise Profit not sure if you remember me :) but I've finaly decided to make another attempt to "correct" my entry with your help. But now, I can't even find the deleted article I posed in July 2012. Do you know what actually happened to it? I really need your help. Thanks,Karlrichards (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)Karlrichards
- The article has been deleted, but I'll restore a copy of the last version to User:Karlrichards/Michelle Denise Profit so you can work on it again. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Category:Hunan culture
Category:Hunan culture, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Makecat 14:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Bus Routes
I've noticed that you believe that some bus routes pages are not notable. To clarify on what what pages are notable can you please look through these pages and tell me the ones (if any) which are notable.
- List of bus routes in Central Suffolk
- List of bus routes in Soham
- List of bus routes in Peterborough
- List of bus routes in Cambridge (Strange this page exists as it is covered by List of bus routes in Cambridgeshire)
- List of bus routes in Colchester
Englandtransport (talk) 19:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not particularly enthusiastic about any of these lists, but I find that it's easier to make an argument against the existence of the lists that are mostly unsourced. The Peterborough and Colchester ones have dozens of citations so I'd have a harder time advocating for their deletion. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 08:09, 4 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Deletion review request. Why was John B. Kimble deleted? The deletion review was not completed and mostly keep or no consensus. Please tell me how to appeal the deletion as I believe it to be improper. 68.50.111.217 (talk) 05:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- I will take this article to deletion review for you, but once it is there, you will have to provide your own defense of why the article should have been kept, because I disagree with you. Substantially all of the "keep" supporters had no edits to anything other than the article itself or its AfD, which is generally not a good sign. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've started the deletion review for you at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 February 17 -- it is up to you to convince people there. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your help. 68.50.111.217 (talk) 08:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Documentary television series
When I retargeted it I didn't intended to close the discussion; the proposed target was clearly better then the previous one so I went ahead and retargeted it, but I left the RFD open. That's why I used a {{done}} instead of simply closing the RFD. I don't object to your closing the RFD on your own authority, but when you say "The result of the discussion was retargeted to Television documentary by User:Emmette Hernandez Coleman" it makes it sound like you're doing it on my behalf. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- We may have had a miusunderstanding, then. From my perspective, when you retargeted the redirect, it looked like you were closing the discussion because there would have been no point in discussing a redirect that went to a different page compared to when it was nominated. In any event, though, I don't think anyone is likely to disagree with the retargeting to Television documentary, so my inclination is to leave well enough alone now. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- I disagree that there would have no point continuing the RFD. Not speaking about this RFD in particular, just in general. Just because somebody proposes an obviously better target doesn't necessarily make that an ideal, or even a good or correct target.
- Say for example you have an RFD on a redirect with a bad target. Somebody finds a better, but still bad target. Somebody else finds a good or ideal target, and the result of the RFD is to retarget to that good target. I might retarget the redirect to that better but still bad target after it's been proposed, but we don't want to end the RFD at that point. If we do we're just going with a bad target because it's not as bad then the previous bad target. When I use a {{done}} template like that, I'm not making a judgment call as to weather that's the target we're going to go with, or even if it's a good or correct target, just that it's clearly better then the current one. Somebody may still find a better target, or the redirect may still be deleted. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Charlie Ray for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charlie Ray is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Ray (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave for deletion?
- Could you kindly join in and give a helping hand in assessing and progressing. A well reasoned assessment with reference to Wikipedia policies & guidelines would clearly be needed. I feel that the deletion discussion would have been slam-dunk case if the papal election frenzy and the Media circus would not have entered the scene. Arguments like I "feel" so and so is unfortunately a notoriously difficult assessment tool and not always agreeable with encyclopedic sentiments. A bad example of a non-convincing argument from the discussion in question is: Well what utter crap! I'm a reader of Wikipedia and I found myself at this article because I wanted to know about the likely candidates, and a useful article I found it. Well I don't care whether it meets whatever "core policies" you're talking about, but I do care whether it provides me with information I need. And it does, so cut the crap about deleting it.
- What arguments i.e. policies & guidelines do you think are most convincing or/and could some be left out?
- So far these points have been cited as relevant :
- KEEP
- WP:GNG (cited once)
- DELETE
- WP:CRYSTAL
- WP:OR
- WP:V
- WP:NOTADVOCATE
- WP:NOTOPINION
- WP:RNPOV
- WP:COMPREHENSIVE
- WP:IRS
- WP:FRINGE
- WP:NOTGOSSIP
- WP:NEWSORG
- WP:YESPOV
- WP:WEIGHT
- Which is it?
- Thank you for taking a look at all of this! --Pgarret (talk) 14:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- I have seen the article and the AfD. I'm not sure what I will recommend in the AfD, if I do participate. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
La Paz
Thanks for that. It's been really frustrating to see this keep happening over and over, so hopefully the notice will do some good. Bearcat (talk) 03:31, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Helon
Please tell me what WikiProject templates are appropriate for the Helon article, or add them yourself. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation? I don't think the article has only a single subject. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- It has a great many subjects. I refuse to review it without templates. It can wait. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
March 2013
Hello. I noticed that you agreed with me about deleting an article. The guy turned around and made it again, and it isn't much better to me, but maybe it is allowed. Will you look at the new one please? Thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_homophobic_Filipino_personalities U81I82 (talk) 02:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Considering that there are no other "List of homophobic ..." articles (see [1]), I didn't think this article should be maintained. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of American Presbyterian Church for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article American Presbyterian Church is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Presbyterian Church until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 17:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast
 You are invited to join WikiProject Breakfast, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of breakfast-related topics. |
|---|
Lifting the Gibraltar DYK restrictions
A couple of months ago, you opposed a proposal to lift the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012. Could you possibly clarify (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions? Prioryman (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Regarding Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs, the existing restrictions allow as many as one Gibraltar DYK per day. That's more than four times as many as there were last year. I don't think the restrictions are particularly harsh, so it would probably be at least a year from now before I would consider supporting lifting them. And even then, I still might support keeping them in place. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
re-creation of Bitch Bastardson page
the page for [[2]] was marked for speedy deletion. id like to put it back up, this time with scans of the original magazine and a partial interview from the author since i am presuming that the page was deleted due to lack of documentation. i wasnt sure how to label it a stub to make it clear that one of the reasons for creating it was to solicit more information. I was waiting to get permission from the author before posting the image scans, and that has been accomplished. not sure what more you need that but im open to suggestions before proceeding. 'Bitch Bastardson' is the real name of the comic and it's not an attack page as the author is proud of the work and intended it to be edgy. thanks: comicburn More real than real. (talk) 15:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- My recommendation would be to re-create the article within your own userspace (at User:Comicburn/Bitch Bastardson) before moving it to the mainspace. The issue of attack page (or negative biography of a living person) was focused primarily on the allegations that the cartoonist was subjected to criminal investigation for her creation of the comic. No sources were provided to prove that. I would emphasize that adding reliable independent sources to establish the notability of this comic is much more important than posting scans of the comic. The interview with the author might qualify but that depends on where the interview was published. If you want to label the article a stub, I recommend using the template {{Webcomic-stub}}. I hope this helps. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:17, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
HiSilicon
Could I possibly get the content from HiSilicon so that I might expand on it and resubmit the page? Bostwickenator (talk) 23:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I've restored the content at User:Bostwickenator/HiSilicon. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- Brilliant thank you Bostwickenator (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
| | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Metropolitan90. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |