User talk:TexasAndroid/Archive13

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

Archives	2005 First half, 2006 Second half, 2006 First half, 2007 July - Aug, 2007 Sep - Dec, 2007 Jan - May, 2008 May - Dec, 2008 Jan - May, 2009 June - Dec, 2009 Jan - June, 2010 July 2010 - Dec 2011 First half, 2012 Second half, 2012 2013 2014 Current

Laurence Oliphant (Scottish politician)

Hi TexasAndroid, I am new and need help! My name is Roddy Oliphant of Oliphant, yr. I am the next chief of my clan but more importantly, I am the clan historian. I want to create pages for a number of distinguished Oliphants for whom there are only references at the moment but who do not have pages of their own, or very brief "stubs". I have the historical knowledge but not the know-how of the protocols etc. for Wikipedia and it seems that I have already fallen fowl - which is not what I want to do at all! The first person for whom I want to create a page is Laurence Oliphant (Scottish politician)

Burkes Landed Gentry, 2001 edition, volume 2 states:-

"Laurence Oliphant, Esq. 8th of Condie, M.P. for Perth 1832-37, b. 22 June, 1791; m. 1st, 1814, Eliza, 2nd dau. of Hercules Ross, Esq. of Rossie Castle, co. Forfar, which lady d. 1820. He m. 2ndly, 1825, Margaret G. Barrett, relict of Samuel Barrett, Esq. of Jamaica, and 3rdly, 19 Aug. 1841, Marianne, eldest dau. of James Stuart Oliphant, Esq. of Rossie, and by the last only had issue Laurence James, now of Condie and Newton. Mary Anne, m. 1867, Thomas S. Walker, Esq. of Maunby Hall, Co. York, and by him (who d. 1878) has issue. Madalina Helen, d. 1884. Frances Louisa. Susan Sophia. He d. 29 May, 1862." His son, Major General Sir Laurence James Oliphant already has a page, as does his brother Sir Anthony Oliphant Chief Justice of Ceylon. In a book called "Forgandenny, a Place in History" it deals with much of Laurence's life and states that Laurence Oliphant (8th of Condie)was also a JP and worked with the Perth Harbour Commission to improve facilities for access to Perth Harbour. He was also on the board of the Scottish Central Railway. [- see page 299] In becoming a politician, his first election had been bitterly opposed because of his support for the Reform Act. His election manifesto included:- 1. opposition to people receiving places, pensions or sinecures (the abolition of patronage, protectionism and privilege) 2. he was hostile to slavery 3. he opposed monopolies 4. he was against the Corn Laws 5. he wanted reform of government Burghs, such that they should be elected by all citizens (and not just by the elite). Provost Wright nominated Lord James Stuart as a candidate to stand against Oliphant but on the day of the election polling was stopped as Laurence had 458 votes to Lord James Stuart's 205 votes out of a possible 780 votes. [See page 248]

The point is that Laurence was part of a family group who were all distinguished in their day:- Laurence was a reformer/Member of Parliament he was also the 30th Chief of the Oliphants

(his son) Major General Sir Laurence James Oliphant was 9th of Condie and 31st Chief of the Clan Oliphant.

(his brother) Sir Anthony was Attorney General of Cape Colonies (South Africa); Chief Justice of Ceylon; had the first tea estate in Ceylon and introduced the first Chinese tea plants into Ceylon. Sir Anthony's son was Laurence Oliphant also a Member of Parliament; author; traveller; diplomat; mystic and Chrisitian Zionist.

(his brother) Lt. Col. James Oliphant was Chief Director/Chairman of the Honourable East India Company [see page 457]One of Col James's grandsons was Sir Lancelot Oliphant, British Ambassador to the Belgians and was married to the Viscountess Churchill. Sir Lancelot is one of the first examples in modern times of Diplomatic Privilege being violated as he was interned by the Germans whilst trying to get back to Britain.

(his brother) Thomas Oliphant was the unofficial Court Musician, either composing tunes or writing the lyrics to many pieces in the 19th century. He wrote, for instance, the chorale for King Edward VII's and Queen Alexandra's wedding. The words to "Deck the Hall with Boughs of Holly" were attributed to him. He translated portions of Wagner's "Lohengrin" into English, which was then conducted by the composer. [National Dictionary of Biographies] He was also author of a number of books: "La Musica Madrigalesca"; "Welsh Melodies with Welsh and English poetry" by John Jones (Talhaiarn) and Thomas Oliphant in four volumes: The first two were published in 1862, the third in 1870, fourth 1874.

TexasAndroid, some of these people have entries already and some do not. I want to work on them all, one at a time.

Rod Oliphant (talk) 00:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I would say that the first step is to not press Save on an article until you have a basic article ready to go. The one I deleted said all of "Eldest son of Ebenezer Oliphant, 7th of Condie". Notability is not inherited. So just being someone's son says nothing about why the person himself is notable. You need to get at least a basic set of information into the article before you Save. Another option, if you want to build an article slowly, piece by piece, is to build it in a sandbox area in your own user space, and then move it out to the article space once it's ready to go. If you want to try this, I can show you how.

If you look at your talk page, you'll see a welcome notice, with a number of very useful links shown. Read them. They give lots of critical information on what to do and what to not do on the project.

It's a bit of a wild place here, but welcome aboard. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks TexasAndroid, that is brilliant. I had intended to build on the page last night and was really just trying to work out links etc. to other pages. I did not realise that I had, in effect, "reversed out onto a freeway whilst playing with Daddy's car"! I will be more careful in the future. If I may, I will put something together in my sandbox and then contact you to have a look at it once I am ready please. (Rod Oliphant (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC))

Hi TexasAndroid, I was wondering whether you could have a look at an "Articles for Creation" page which I have started for Laurence Oliphant please:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Laurence_Oliphant_(Scottish_politician) I have more information to add to it but not today! What happens next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rod Oliphant (talk • contribs) 00:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC) Sorry!(Rod Oliphant (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC))

Sigh. I typed a fairly long response yesterday, and it appears to have not saved. :( I'll see about re-typing it all out in the next day or two. - TexasAndroid (talk) 01:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Trying to remember my point from the first time...

1) Notability. The new article makes what is, at the least, an assertion of notability. that of him being a member of a parliament. (Which parliament is a different issue I'll cover later.) Whether or not being a member of the (I assume) Scottish parliament is enough to fully satisfy notability, I do not know. Most likely it is. But for now at least it's enough that the new article is not subject to speedy deletion for notability. At the worst case now, someone would need to start a full deletion debate, which would allow you to argue for it's keeping. I do not think that will happen, but it's IMHO a worst case for you at this point.

2) I did a sample edit of additional linking. Wikifying, we call it. You linked up nicely to articles on other people, but you generally also want to link titles that may be ambiguous, and to things that others may want to jump to for more information. In the edit I made, I linked to his clan and to the city as examples of the second type. For the first, the article as it was was vague on exactly which parliament he was a member of. I guessed the Scottish Parliament, from the location of his clan, but that was just a guess. You do not actually have to detail it out in this case. By linking to an article on the Scottish Parliament, it becomes clear to anyone who clicks the link exactly which parliament is at issue.

Enough for now. I'll see if I can remember anything else I originally typed. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh...

3) Categories. You have none on the article at the moment. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear TexasAndroid, many thanks for your critique. I have not got my head around Categories, so I will work on that. By the way, he was a Member of Parliament at Westminister. The Scottish Parliament was only created a couple of decades ago and so I have taken your advice and made the link to one of the (many) pages for the Westminister Parliament so that it is clear. I have not searched to see whether there is a full list of all Westminister MPs ever, but if I find one then I will link to that too. I know that it is too much detail but actually the Scottish Parliaments members are MSPs rather than MPs to differentiate. Can you put the page "up" for me (onto Wikipedia or is there another process which I should follow? Regards, (Rod Oliphant (talk) 13:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC))

Done/Moved. I would say you have a decent starting article at this point.

I've also tagged it for missing categories. This will bring attention from people who specialize in categorizing things. If you do not figure out how to categorize it within a couple of days, the tag should get someone else to help you on that issue. As a general idea, you likely want categories for his birth and death years, one for his MP status, and maybe one for his clan membership, if there is one for the clan. You also might want one for "People from Perth", and if he had any significant occupation outside of politics, you might want one for that.

And I remembered:

4) You have an infobox present, but nothing filled out in it. You likely want to either fill it out, or remove it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks TexasAndroid. I have put in some categories but would welcome more if appropriate. I also added the box at the bottom about "Preceded by" and "Succeeded by" (as you will have seen). I will investigate the Info Box and also learn how to upload images as I have a photograph of Laurence as well (and another of his home drawn by Thomas the musician). The truth is, absolutely nobody in the family even remembers that he was an MP, the court case is the only facet of his life which people ever talk about - the female line hate us to this day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rod Oliphant (talk • contribs) 17:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Oliphant (musician and artist)

Hi TexasAndroid, I have started another page. Could I ask you to cast your eye over it and if appropriate, move it too please. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Thomas_Oliphant_%28Musician_and_artist%29#Some_Musical_Works_by_Thomas Thanks. (Rod Oliphant (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC))

I added a couple of categories. This time you have fully submitted the article for review, and I'll let the review process run its course. I'm not an expert on reviewing new articles. But whoever responds to your review request likely is one. SO you'll get some feedback from someone more experienced at such reviews. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks TexasAndroid for the extra categories. I am not sure that I meant to fully submit the article for review but since I have done so, as you say, let it take it's course. (Rod Oliphant (talk) 18:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC))

This second article has the {{AFC submission}} template at its top. Your first one did not. I'm not fully versed in AFC proceedings, but I'm inclined to believe that the presence of that template, which generates the large yellow box at the top of the article, will eventually bring someone to review the article. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks. I have done the hard work now. There is some fine tuning. I found the evidence I needed today to prove that Thomas wrote Deck the Halls so I am elated. There is a lot of politics in the family and the female line reigned supreme after the court case for nearly 150 years and we left Scotland. In that time, history has been told by the victors. Eight years ago we proved what we could not prove 150 years ago, that the 8th Condie was right. Too late for the Gask inheritance but now my brother is the Chief. The "County" blanked Laurence's death - no obituaries etc. Laurence's page is just that, exactly 150 years after he died the Wiki page is his life's testimony. Deck the Halls is far bigger than anything Lady Nairne wrote - she is claimed by the female line as they are slightly closer related to her. Lady Nairne's Oliphant great grandfather was the common denominator (the Condie Oliphant married a Gask Oliphant daughter). Each member of the family I build the page for, is another brick in the wall. My greatest weapon is to be completely neutral and impartial in giving the history ("the truth will out"). I am not sure that Col. James merits a page. He was the Chairman of the East India Company. I think that Sir Lancelot is my next project. He was interned during the Second World War by the Germans in direct contravention of diplomatic immunity - the first person in modern times to whom that has happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rod Oliphant (talk • contribs) 23:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

James Oliphant

Hi TexasAndroid, I was wondering whether you could cast your eye over this for me please:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Oliphant Many thanks. (Rod Oliphant (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2012 (UTC))

I would say that his notability is not as obvious as the first two. But at a minimum the position with EIC is an assertion of notability, so it's not IMHO eligible for speedy deletion. Whether or not it would survive a full deletion debate if someone started one is another matter.

I removed some categories. They are categories for articles that may be related to the article's subject, but are not actually attributes of the subject. For instance, James was not a "Defunct companies of the United Kingdom". Nor was he a "Cities and towns in Hyderabad district, India". OTOH, he does belong in the EIC category, given his positions there. Similarly, if there exists a specific category for the Hyderbad city that was in your mind when you put him in the city category, he might belong in the city category. Does this distinction make sense? - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:35, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Comedy Central (Latin America), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ugly Americans (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) 11:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Mir-744 microRNA

Hi Texas, Would you mind reinstating the above article and starting a discussion on the article's worth? I think it may be able to be rescued, there are a few pubmed references showing that the gene is notable. --Paul (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

It was not deleted because it wasn't notable. It was deleted under CSD-A1 (No Context). The entire contents of the page was "Mir-744 is an miRNA.". No context, almost no article. Not really anything to restore. If you feel that it's a subject worthy of an article, then absolutely go for it to write one. But what was there is not going to really be of much help to you. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh. Apologies. It's a shame it's not easier to see the contents of deleted articles. No refs or templates either I assume? --Paul (talk) 21:16, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope. Noting of the sort. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Iron Chef

Can I suggest that we take the proposed template from the discussion, create it, update it to include the new material and add it to all of the articles. Then take a look and see if that serves navigation needs. If if does not then recreation of the category would not be a problem to me. If it gets to the point where recreation is reasonable, then the create comment should mention to the first discussion and the fact that there are now 8 (or whatever) articles as opposed to only 4 at the time of the discussion. I can help with the template it you need it. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Worth a try, and the template could easily enough list the chefs themselves as well. I'll look into getting at least an initial version together tomorrow sometime. - TexasAndroid (talk) 00:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, I looked at what you had and made two changes. One was there is no need, in my opinion, to force the size of the template, so I changed that. I also converted it to the new format that automatically takes care of line wraps not being in the middle of anything. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Omnicell

Can you please explain why the Omnicell page was deleted? What explanation of the company's significance would be sufficient to merit it's restoration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yudfgdfhgdf (talk • contribs) 03:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:CORP. That gives criteria for notability for companies. - TexasAndroid (talk) 05:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Bose televisions

Hi, thanks for your improvements to the Bose television/Soundbar disambig page. The previous structure of the Bose product pages was such a mess...slowly it's getting better!1292simon (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. It showed up on the Short Pages report, which I patrol, and was obviously intended to be a disambiguation. I have no opinion on whether or not it *should* be a disambig, but if it is, then it should at least have the proper formatting for one. - TexasAndroid (talk) 20:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you for keeping me in line! Dan.h.ross (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Photo requests

Hi! About this request - Not all requests necessarily correspond to articles, but a photo of the SA main post office would be helpful for an article about government in San Antonio (which would cover the federal government) WhisperToMe (talk) 21:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Interesting point. How about this? If you can point me to an article that would be improved by a photo of the SA main post office, I'll gladly add it back. There's not really a "Government in San Antonio" article that I can see. Closest I can find would be San Antonio#State and federal representation, which does have a (very) brief mention of the building. OTOH, if you were to add it back yourself, I'm not about to edit-war to remove it again. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I started the section San_Antonio,_Texas#State_and_federal_representation a while back to mention state and federal facilities in San Antonio. It could be expanded into a full article at some point WhisperToMe (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

TheSpecialKclub

Did Twinkle make a mistake when informing the user of the deletion (I don't have admin rights, thus don't know where the page should be moved to)? I went to check on User:TheSpecialKclub, but it said the account wasn't registered. Feinoha ^{Talk, My master} 18:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking. I trusted TW and did not check myself when I tagged it... - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

A big TY for the notice. TW did indeed put it in the wrong place. Wierd. I think I have cleaned up. The proper author has been notified, and the "wrong" location has been G7 deleted. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Just for posterity, the article I was tagging was at Www.thespecialkclub.com, and the proper original author for the notice was User:Everest2U. I had already reverted the user once on the page, and felt it was better to tag it for CSD and let another admin weigh in than it CSD insta-delete it myself. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Devils drop for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Devils drop 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/Devils drop 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Jll (talk) 22:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Mandyk Khasman

I demand the restoration of the article. It is an extraordinary personality, reliably sourced.--Galassi (talk) 14:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Restored for the moment so I can get some assistance to look more closely into his notability. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Requests for assistance have been posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ukraine#Mandyk Khasman and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Mandyk Khasman. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:50, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Long comment

Nominating a redirect for discussion by adding {{Rfd}} apparently causes it to appear at Special:Shortpages; this is, however, a temporary situation as, after seven days, the redirect will be deleted or the {{Rfd}} tag will be removed. Do you think it's really necessary to add {{Long comment}} in such cases? Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 22:50, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely necessary? no. Useful? Yes. It gets them off of the short pages reports, which makes it much easier to see the things that are actually important there. I used to tag them all the time. I got out of the habit, and for the last few months, I've just been working around them. Today I reached a frustration point with them, and cleared them all out.

Ultimately, it's useful to me, and I have yet to see any reason that it harms anyone else. And since I'm the one who puts in the effort to remove them, and I'm willing to put in that effort in order to make things easier on me in other ways, I really do not see "Why not"?

As for it being temporary, they are only a problem for the length of time that they are at RFD. Properly formatted redirects do not show up on the Short Pages reports. So as soon as the RFD is closed, whatever the result, they should not be popping back onto the report. Each RFD is only temporarily cluttering the report, but there are always a number of them doing so.

So ultimately, they are an annoyance to me on the reports, but I have a workaround that only inconveniences me, and does so less than having the RFDs cluttering the report. - TexasAndroid (talk) 23:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense; thank you for explaining. From now on, I'll try to remember to add {{Long comment}} whenever I nominate a redirect for discussion. I'm also considering whether a more permanent fix would be possible – e.g., requiring the deletion template to be substituted rather than transcluded. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

In light of our discussion, I have proposed at Template talk:Rfd#Substitution what I hope can be a permanent solution to the problem, and I thought you might be interested in the discussion. Best, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear TexasAndroid,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Riverfront Trail, Greater Moncton

Sorry about the mess with this page move, I'll be more careful in the future about moving pages. I think it's the first time I've ever created such a problem. Just so I know, though, the only way to reverse that move while retaining the edit history is through a request to admin? thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Once you do a cut&paste move, it requires an admin in order to do a history merge to straighten things out. That's because a history merge requires, as one of the steps, breifly deleting one of the pages being merged, and only admins can do that.

That said, as long as you have not done a cut&paste move, or edited the original page (like you did in blanking the redirect), you should be able to do a second Move right back to where the page originated.

So ultimately, blanking the redirect was where you first went wrong. You should not blank things in general, but in this case doing so blocked you from moving the page back, and your following actions flowed from that. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Right, and even if it was blocked for some reason, I see I could have chosen Riverfront Trail (Greater Moncton), per the naming structure I see at the disambig page for Riverfront Park, which I believe is preferred anyway, since Riverfront Trail is not a settlement. Thanks. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Sprota (mother of Richard I, Duke of Normandy)

I’d like to request you restore this article. I’ve been working on upgrading articles in this category and I saw Sprota’s article needed more so I ordered the resources I needed. Unfortunately, they arrived but the article had by then been deleted. I don’t see it as being more than a stub, but she is a significant ancestor to hundreds of kings of France, Spain, England, Scotland, et al. I’d like to see what I can do with it. Thanks Bearpatch (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you give me an exact link to the article you are talking about? The string in your section title above does not match any deleted article. It's hard to make a judgement about undeletion, let alone do an undeletion, until I know what article is being asked about. Sorry. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, it's at: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sprota&action=edit&redlink=1 Bearpatch (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The entirety of the deleted article was a single edit of: "Sporta was the wife of William I, Duke of Normandy.". Nothing more. Not really much to be of use there. If you want to create a new article, go for it. But the deleted edit is not going to be of any real help, sorry. - TexasAndroid (talk) 17:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I understand, I'll go ahead with a new article. Thank you. Bearpatch (talk) 17:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Substing Rfd

The Rfd template says you're not supposed to subst it, but you did. Why?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

See the talk page of {{rfd/core}}. This has been in development since sometime last week. We are changing the instructions. In fact, I'm just now getting to the step of changing the actual instructions. Getting the new format into place needed to happen before I went around changing the instructions. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

On notability

In the last 12 hours, you have tagged two taxonomic articles with {{notability}} – Corylophidae and Acontista multicolor. In both cases, the addition of that tag was clearly unhelpful. It should have been perfectly obvious to any reasonable person that both are notable. Firstly, all species are considered to be notable, by longstanding tradition. Secondly, both articles have a significant number of incoming links. Thirdly, the most cursory of searches would have revealed a large number of reliable sources discussing the subjects. While there might be some doubt about species, I am truly staggered that someone might consider a family not to be notable! I would recommend that you avoid tagging articles for notability unless your accuracy can improve considerably. --Stemonitis (talk) 07:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Noted - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Centennial Museum

I think I may have erred, and I'd like you to look at it. The correct name of this museum is Centennial Museum and Chihuahuan Desert Gardens, per the Official Site. I moved the page. In starting to correct the double redirects, I see in "What Links Here" that there may have already existed a page by that name. Making this a duplicate page. Are you able to assist with correcting this? Maile66 (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I made a change. Did that remove what you were referring to? If so, it was not that there was already a page by that name, but rather that you had set up a circular wiki-link, with a redirect, that pointed right back to the same page. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that fixed it. Thank you. Oh, I see what happened by looking at the history. I think that circular link was already in there when I did the move. Interesting. Maile66 (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Since you're an admin and all, is it possible to get deleted or blocked from Wikipedia by a record label because you've done in good faith edits (spelling, rewording, original research, etc.) to an artist's page on Wikipedia? An artist tweeted me saying that I've "repeated[ly] made [stuff] up and caused problems." The making stuff up is from original research and causing problems would be changes in the spelling and rewording. So back to my question, is it possible to be blocked from Wikipedia when you haven't caused any vandalism? I really don't think so. Devin Davis (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to be blocked for things other than vandalism? Absolutely. Spamming, edit warring, copyright violations, making legal threats, being abusive to other editors, and having an improper user name are all examples of things that can get someone blocked. In general, though, you are supposed to get warnings on your talk page that your behavior is violating one rule or another before things reach the point of blocks. A common phrase around here is "Blocks are preventative, not punitive". This means that the point of blocks is to prevent bad behavior, not to punish it. So if a warning is enough to prevent, that's generally much better than blocking. There are exceptions, but that's generally how things work.

Now, I really doubt that just innocent spelling and rewording would end up in blocks, but avoiding Original Research is a core policy. Repeatedly violating that one *could* result in blocks. OTOH, as mentioned above, you should receive plenty of warning before it reaches that point. And blocks would start short. Only if you then continued the same actions again and again would things likely reach a point of lengthy or indefinite blocking. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't think an artist had a say in what their Wikipedia page and subpages said. The artist also wants false information on of their pages and I've changed it to the real information (Here's where the 'making stuff up' comes in) and almost as soon as I changed it, it got reverted to the previous version. I don't think that's right. But I didn't do anything wrong nor anything you stated above. So it was just a threat and there's nothing to worry about. Devin Davis (talk) 19:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. The subject of a random page has no authority to issue blocks. Anyone is free to ask an admin to act, including the random article subject, but if the admin is responsible they will evaluate the situation themselves in light of the project's rules, not just act blindly on requests. So if you are not violating the rules, you should have nothing to worry about.

And if they are threatening you, they may very well be violating the "No Legal Threats" rule on the project themselves.

You might want to report the situation over at the Bio of Living People Noticeboard. That is a place where people who are well knowledgeable in the rules around biographies hang out and give assistance. The Conflict of Interest Noticeboard is another such place, this one focusing on handling conflict of interest editing. Either could bring in additional experienced eyes that could help support if the random article subject is being belligerent. Do be aware, whoever comes will likely evaluate the situation themselves. I'm assuming that what you are saying is true, for the sake of this posting, but if it isn't, then you could be the subject of warnings if you are the one in violation. But if what you say is indeed true, then bringing in extra, independent eyes to a situation is generally a very good thing. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Blanking of redirects for Nalanda Maha Vidyalaya Colombo

Thanks for your message. I was trying to rename this page to Nalanda College, Colombo according to WP:COMMONNAME - most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language for this school is Nalanda College Colombo. If you can help it will be much appreciated.(Masu7 (talk) 22:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)).

Done. For future reference then, the proper way to get such a move done when there are redirects blocking the way is to request it at WP:RM. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Another is to tag the target redirect with {{db-move}}. This will, hopefully within a few hours, get an admin to delete the blocking redirect, clearing the way for the move. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

You are a champion and thanking you heaps for the understanding and support. Highly appreciated and keep up the good work.(Masu7 (talk) 22:31, 5 March 2012 (UTC)).

Street Fighter X Tekken

Thanks for moving Street Fighter X Tekken back to its proper place. Can you please do the same for the associated Talk page as well? Thank you! -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 14:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Crap. Missed that. Done. I've also move-protected the page for a month. I do not personally care what it is named, but the multiple moves, and IP attempts at cut&paste moving it back, etc, were getting disruptive. If a rename is really needed, and consensus can be reached on the article's talk page, then it can be easily enough moved to a different name. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Much appreciated. No rename was needed to begin with, as this is the name on the box and as such, we weren't going to touch it; the first rename was done by another user, one who had previously made vandalizing edits to the page, without any prior discussion. In any case, this works out great since I was planning to ask for protection anyway as a preventative measure against the flood of IP vandals that always seem to show up during a big game's launch period. Thanks again! -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Note that I *only* enabled move protection, not edit protection. If you want edit protection of any level, you'll need to go through WP:RFPP. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Uboater

I note that Uboater has withdrawn his legal threat against WP and that you have unblocked him, but I would note that his threat was not only against WP but also against me as a Wikipedian and he did not specifically withdraw the threat against me. I'd ask that you ask him to supplement his withdrawal to specifically include me. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) | DR goes to Wikimania! 22:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. Tricky situation. I read it as a blanket withdrawal, but I can see how it can be read otherwise. I'm hesitant to go "poke the bear" at this time, as we seem to have him calmed down from where he was earlier.

Do you think you can move forward with things as they are? Without having clarifying wording forced out of him? He now has a lot of eyes, especially admin eyes, on him. If he starts making any more threats, veiled or blatant, I expect he'll be blocked again quite quickly. And, as I tried to tell him, any action from a UK court is likely to have little effect on WP, or US users. And even if he did issue the clarifying wording, it would have no binding on his off-project actions.

I also suspect that I'm not the right one to ask for such a clarification. In his eyes now I'm one of the bad guys around here.

So, in general, I'm hesitant to go asking him for such a clarification. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I asked for the clarification before you posted to his talk page. I won't make you go back on what you've said (no criticism intended to you, at all, indeed, thanks for what you've done). Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) | DR goes to Wikimania! 22:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear TexasAndroid Once again this psmD has edeitid this page, removing conent that you and others have aproved. Is is her that caused all the trouble last week and I feel that she is being maliciously and vindictive towards the trust, if she removes anything else their wont be anthing left.Uboater (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I have not approved any content. My only connection to all this was in handling your legal threats, in response to a request for assistance on one of the admin notice boards. That said, it is time to take your content disagreement with User:PamD to the talk page of the article. There you can lay out the reasons you think the content should be there, and PamD can lay or their reasons that they think it should not be there. And at this point, after the recent very public (on Wikipedia, at least) situation with your brief blocking, you have a lot of extra eyes on the situation. Which means more people to participate in the discussion. Which is generally a very good thing. If you still do not like the outcome, I again offer to point you in the proper direction for how to resolve disputes within the structures of the project. I cannot guarantee you the final result that you want, but I can at least help you to know the proper steps to take to move your issue forward. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Criteria

Hello. You removed a speedy deletion tag without noting the criteria. Adel (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The criteria changed while I was declining it. Not sure why I did not get an edit conflict notice, though. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

OK. Adel (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Also note that templating admins, who are acting in an admin capacity, is likely a Bad Idea. I'm not saying that disagreeing with admins is bad, but templating one? - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't notice you were an admin. I rarely look at userpages. Apologies. Adel (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not offended or angry or any such, but honestly, my opinion when first seeing the full template, before you edited it down, was pretty much "WTF?", as it accused me of removing a CSD tag from a page I created. And I was pretty sure I had not done any such.  :)

Templating regulars/experienced editors is in general a bad idea, as it tends to irritate rather than inform. And templating admins for doing their job? Not a good way to go about things. So I guess my point, and the lesson to learn here, is to be a bit more cautious about who you template. Whether admin or just a general experienced editor, there is a good chance that templating will generate bad reactions. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

List of Billboard Hot 100 top 10 singles in 1998

So I know you have everything up to 1999 up, are you gonna be able to do 1998? Arjoccolenty (talk)

Hmm. I'm not sure why you think I was the editor of those. It's possible I did a wiki-gnomish edit to one or another at some time, but I certainly was not involved in the actual assembly of those articles. Sorry. - TexasAndroid (talk) 04:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

XT3

Hi, I changed XT2 and XT3 to make XT3 the main page and XT2 redirect to XT3. Users are mostly searching for XT3, the new product than for XT2, the old one. Is it ok ? --CRJO-CRJO (talk) 15:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Likely want to update the page as well, then. The page was a lot of "X2" this and "X2" that. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

You are right. This should be better. As I'm working from EVS, I'm not too confortable to add information there, hard to remain "objective" in this case :-) --CRJO-CRJO (talk) 15:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Rfd template problem

Hi, I hope you're the right person to approach with this. There's a problem with {{rfd}} - I saw that it recently changed from never being substed to always having to be substed, but you mentioned at Template talk:Rfd/core that you felt you'd missed something in updating the documentation. The bit you missed was the text of the template message itself. :) It still instructs users firmly not to substitute it. I raised this on the talk page a couple of weeks ago and someone else just noticed it too and replied. I think it might have slipped under your radar. Please could you drop by and check it out? Thanks :) ~ Kimelea (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

A quick look shows that the "Do not subst" message is from the Rfd/core template, not the Rfd template. And the /core is not supposed to be substed, so the message is *technically* correct. I'll try to find time tomorrow to wade into this a bit deeper, but it's not as simple as just changing the message. - TexasAndroid (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

...I have no idea what you just said. :D Glad I didn't try to fix it myself! But Rossami is talking about reverting the changes to the template, so I'll leave it with you, if that's ok. I just know that when you stick {{rfd}} on something without substituting, the box says don't subst and the big red warning message says do subst. ~ Kimelea (talk) 02:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Can you also delete Magic Hour (album) as i forgot to tag it. There are 2 articles for Magic Hour (album) so i renamed them to Magic Hour (Cast album) and Magic Hour (Scissor Sisters album). ...so Magic Hour (album) no longer needs to exist since i already update the disambig page for the new titles. Thanks Jenova20 16:24, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It needs to exist since that was the location of the page for 6+ years. External links, search terms, etc are reasons for redirects beyond simply cleaning up the internal links. And just in general, when a page is moved from it's long term name to a new name, a redirect is left at the old name. - TexasAndroid (talk) 17:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, i get ya... Well anyway i combined the 2 disambig pages since Magic hour and The Magic Hour were listing the sameish stuff and it's just common sense. The Magic Hour is now a redirect to Magic hour.

Magic Hour (album) is also a redirect going to the disambig page now (Magic hour).

There's apparently 4 or 5 albums of similar name there so if people don't use the exact article name they end up at the disambig page - much simpler! and satisfied my neat freakishness for the day! =]

Thanks Jenova20 22:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

*facepalm*

Hey, TexasAndroid, thanks for declining my CSDs. I'm so used to doing them on new pages that I didn't even think to check the history to see if they weren't new. :P Sorry about that! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

NP - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Redirect 1,2-diphenylhydrazine

1,2-diphenylhydrazine now redirects to benzidine. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine is not synonymous with benzidine. It is merely mentioned in the benzidine article as a precursor, from which to make benzidine. I have deleted the link in the benzidine article to 1,2-diphenylhydrazine, as by the redirect it resulted in a circular link/redirect from the benzidine article to 1,2-diphenylhydrazine, from there redirected back to benzidine article, which made no sense. There are no other articles linking to 1,2-diphenylhydrazine, it is an orphan now. I propose to either fill the article with real content or to delete it. I believe redirects should largely be used to resolve synonyms or to direct to an article containing information about the item. I am not sure if this is the case here. I leave this to you. 70.137.142.210 (talk) 15:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I leave it right back to you. If you want an article, you are welcome to write one. If you want it deleted, you are welcome to start a deletion debate on it at WP:RFD. You are not welcome to just WP:BLANK it, which is what was done. Blanking of articles is (almost) never the proper way to handle bad content.

But I am not able to write up the article, nor am I the right one to start a deletion debate. If you want it deleted, you need to be the one to lay out your reasoning at the debate, not me. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TexasAndroid. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 02:41, 27 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disamb hatnote question

Hi TexasAndroid. Thanks for moving Douglas Tait (disambiguation) to Douglas Tait. That seems clearly right to me. But I noticed you changed the hatnote links at Douglas Tait (illustrator) and Douglas Tait (stuntman) to point to what is now the actual disamb at Douglas Tait rather than Douglas Tait (disambiguation) which now is just a redirect to the real disamb at Douglas Tait. For hatnotes (and I guess other cases where we intentionally link to a disamb page, thoguh I can't think of any), I thought we were supposed to keep the link pointing to the redirect with "(disambiguation)" in the title even when that is only a redirect to the actual disambiguation page. (WP:FURTHERDAB). Am I right or am I missing something? This does make it easier to see links that need to be disambiguated (obviously the hatnotes do not need to be) when you look at "what links here" from the actual disamb page. Thanks! Novaseminary (talk) 14:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I admit to ignorance of the proper way to do it in this case. I made the move, and then cleaned up after the move in a way that made sense to me. You however raise good points that it may be better the other way. If there is a proper or standard way, then so be it. Feel absolutely free to revert my changes if they are against the normal way of handling things like this. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Will do. I had done exactly what you did (but when adding hatnotes once), only to have another ed change them to point to the disamb. That seemed strange to me, but after he pointed it out, it made sense. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. Novaseminary (talk) 14:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

'Space communication'=a private company?

Hi, I have edited 'Space communication' wiki term so that it does not redirect to a private company, but instead explain the concept of communication through outer space. You reverted my edit and left the cryptic message 'rv dictionary definition'. What does that mean? Is this a bureaucratic guideline or is there really some thought into your correction? Pls answer on the Space_Communication page talk (original page, not redirected).

Colydiini

You wrote:

Decline CSD. Self redirects are a reason to fix the link on the target page, not a reason to delete the redirect.

I assume you are going to write the article Colydiini to get rid of the self-redirect at Colydiinae. What will be your source on nomenclature and taxonomy? I did not find any, or those that I found did either a) not go tribal or b) mixed up Colydiini and Synchitini.

If you are not going to write the article, please restore the RfSD because WP:R#Self-redirects states clearly:

Avoid linking to titles which redirect straight back to the page on which the link is found.

The link cannot be "fixed" otherwise (e.g. by removing it or changing the wording). The redirect was originally created in November 2009 from here; it is obviously a good-faith error - none of the others were ever made redirects. Hence Speedy G6 applies ("unambiguously created in error").

Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

If you want it gone, please use WP:RFD. Or make a 4-character edit to the target to make it not a link, and then not self redirect. That is what I meant by "fixing" the link. If the link is bad, make it not a link, and you no longer have a self-redirect. When I read your snippet on self redirects, to me that is talking about what should (or should not) happen on the target article. It is not an excuse for speedy deletion. Whether or not it would serve as the basis for deletion at a full RFD debate, I do not know. But it is stating what should happen at the target, not what should happen to the redirect.

As a theoretical situation, you could have a page A with a link to redirect B that links back to A. And then you have 24 other pages C - Z that also use B to link to A. Does your quote about self redirects mean that B should be deleted, creating red links of 24 pages, just because of the one self redirect? IMHO, it absolutely does not. It means that A should be edited to not link to B. A 4-character edit, and A no longer links to B. No more self-redirect, and the other 24 pages are not harmed.

I'm not saying that there are 24 other pages linking to your target via this one link. Just that the snippet that you quote does not support what you think it supports, or it would also support the bad outcome in my theoretical above. And without that, you do not have your "obvious error" on which you hang a G6 deletion. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Removing pointless Apple articles.

I removed Apple-related so-called "outline" articles, as they served no function being EXACT repeats of the info on other main topic articles as well as info box templates clearly existing with the same info laid out identically on them too. They featuring absolutely no additional information, no new purpose, and all had the low merit template or similar on them accordingly. All the info on them was already given in exactly the same form on other main Apple-related pages, as should have ben checked before creation by checking pre-existing pages listed on the mass of Apple templates first (see here: User:Jimthing/Apple). Unless there is a clear reason for their existence —when they feature identical info found on another page on the WP— they shouldn't be created. Not all subjects need to have such "outline" pages, when other pages already exist for several years that clearly happen to already do the exact same purpose. Jimthing (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

In that case, either redirect them to the section of the article for which they are a duplicate, or submit them to one of the systems for deletion on the project. I see that you have submitted them now for speedy deletion. That may work, though I'm not positive that they meet the "speedy" deletion criteria. The closest is A10, but that is supposed to be for "recent" creations. These pages are over 2 years old, which is not really recent. You may need to take them to a full WP:AFD. Or, as I mention above, you could try just redirecting them to the other home of the same information, and not bother with an AFD until/unless the redirect is reverted. - TexasAndroid (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Ken Birman

Hi; you just deleted this (auto)biography (was author-blanked). Could you usefy it for me, please? I think this person is notable and that stub may help me get started writing a real bio. Thanks! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

It's now at User:Guillaume2303/Ken Birman. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:15, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Nell (band) redirects

That's what happens when I just whizz through copy and pasting without paying attention, thanks for clearing it up--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

NP - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk page merge

I redirected Thomas Silhavy to the duplicate Thomas J. Silhavy but the talk pages should be merged. I did not want to do a cut/paste as that is not the right way to do it. Can you do that? ww2censor (talk) 16:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so certain that they should be merged. They are separate talk pages for the separate articles that existed for quite a while. Merging their histories would end up with a shuffled deck of edits from the two versions. I would say that the simplest solution is just to redirect from the duplicate to the main, just as was done on the articles themselves. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

If I redirect the talk pages, then the original talk page will be hidden whereas a merge will at least keep the posts on one page for people to review. Who will think to look at the history? I doubt anyone will do that. ww2censor (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

If you are talking about merging the *contents* of the two talk pages, then you can do that yourself easily enough. But merging the histories is a totally separate matter, and not an action I'm inclined to do in this case. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, ok. So I'll copy/paste the old posts into the current talk page and make a redirect which was what I was hoping to avoid doing. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Boulevard Theatre

Thank you very much for helping to sort out this mess I created. Candleabracadabra (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

NP - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Eternal Life Through Time Travel

I changed my mind. Go ahead and delete the article. It is not really noteworthy you are correct. --RJR3333 (talk) 07:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Victo Records albums

Category:Victo Records albums, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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☯ 08:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Laura Ramsey

What's the deal with User:JesseRafe/Laura Ramsey not having a normal Wikipedia page? I am sure there's a history but she's everywhere nowadays and pretty famous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cglenn3932 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe that you need to talk to User:Bongwarrior, as the most recent admin to delete a recreation of the article. The key is Notability, which is a concept on WIkipedia that means some specific things. In the case of an actress, a series of minor roles is not enough to confer notability. Check out WP:NACTOR. You need to be able to show, preferably with multiple sources that are Reliable, Independent, and Non-Trivial, that one or more criteria is met. The previous deletion discussion determined that the existing sources did not show this. You have the old article in user-space, ready to be edited. If you can find the needed sources to show that she meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, and convince User:Bongwarrior of this, then the article can be put back in article space. If the actress still has had only minor roles, then you are likely fighting a losing battle until/unless she has a more major role. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Abdul-Fattah Abu Ghuddah

Hi TexasAndroid,

Abdul-Fattah Abu Ghuddah is not a living person. --Muhammad Shuaib Nadwi (talk) 19:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The article says that he/she/it is a "scholar", which is generally a term that implies a person. If it is not about a person, then it desperately needs clarification as to what it is. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

About "The Cook Collection: The Australian Museum"

Hi Tex.
I've expressed my concerns here.

"http://collections.australianmuseum.net.au/amweb/pages/am/NarrativeDisplay.php?irn=35&QueryPage=./NarrativeQuery.php" still results in "ERROR: Cannot connect to the KE XML database server."

Puzzled. --Shirt58 (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I've tagged the page for Copyvio, and listed it on the violations tracking page. Searches for large sentences via Google show pages from the museum's database, even if the DB is currently down. The actual pages can be viewed in Google's cache. Here's a sample. That link is the source of the "Society Islands" section, for instance. I'm not sure if the first two paragraphs are violations, which is why I tagged after that point. If they are not, then the page could be salvaged down to just those two, in theory. My listing will bring attention from someone more experienced in evaluating copyright violations. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed with your help and guidance. See Talk:The Cook Collection: The Australian Museum Thanks again, Tex.--Shirt58 (talk) 16:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

No problemo

-- Bojan  Talk  14:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

London Conference of 1838–39

Thanks. Most appreciated. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in South Georgia (U.S. state)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in South Georgia (U.S. state), 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. Kumioko (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Quick

Heh, deleting Zonnique pullins was quick for you! I only CSD'd it seconds before. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 21:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I found it on the Short Pages report, not the CSD listings, and was likely pushing the delete button at the same time that you were listing it. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Heh, okay! It's in my CSD log. :) Regards, Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 21:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Aviya's Summer

Thank you. – Edenc1 • Talk 19:44, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

NP. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Brian Willson

Thanks for your recent edit [1] to Brian Willson. However, as far as I know, Brian Willson is not actually from Concord, California, but was involved in an event in Concord, California. So, I guess the previous category was more appropriate. --Edcolins (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Except, if there is a "People from foo" category for a location foo, we do not generally place people in the main category. Cleaning out articles from the main category was the whole point of my effort. Anyway, the article says that he now lives there, so the "from" category does apply. "People from foo" is the standard name for people X location intersection categories. Whether that intersection arises from birth location, childhood location, current location, or other. If the person is connected to the town enough to get a category for that town, it should be the "People from" category, if such exists. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. You wrote "Anyway, the article says that he now lives there, so the "from" category does apply." I am not sure to follow you. The article says "Willson now lives in Portland, Oregon." As far as I know, Willson is not from Concord, and he never lived there. The category is misleading IMHO. That somebody was involved in an event in a town does not make the person from that town. --Edcolins (talk) 19:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. Not sure how I misread that. Then the appropriate category would more likely be "History of Concord, California", if that existed. It doesn't, and I'm not going to create it for one article. So I have reverted myself. - TexasAndroid (talk) 20:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, good idea. I have just created Category:History of Concord, California. --Edcolins (talk) 19:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Piʻipiʻi Kalanikaulihiwakama

Hi! I am Michelle of Croatia. I think we should delete Piʻipiʻi Kalanikaulihiwakama. User:KAVEBEAR also thinks that. He said to me that is his wish too to delete this article.--Miha (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Please do not revert admins when they decline your deletion request.

Anyway, The decline is because Speedy Deletion is not valid in the current case. G7 deletion is only valid when there are no significant edits by anyone other than the original creator. In this specific case, there have been nine other editors other than yourself. Some are minor, some were bots, but at least one was absolutely major, the conversion of the page into a redirect over two months ago. This all adds up to the G7 not being valid in this case.

That is not to say that the page cannot be deleted, just not in this manner. It would either need to be deleted under a different speedy deletion reason, or under a fuller deletion debate. It's been a redirect for over two months, so the redirect reasons and systems generally hold sway. I do not see any other Redirect or General Speedy Deletion reasons that would likely cover. That leaves you with filing for a deletion debate. WP:RFD is the proper venue for that. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Mean Jeanne Shaheen

Thank you for deleting this. Since it is not a legitimate nickname, and this was the second time this user created it, would you consider salting the earth? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Done - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! – Muboshgu (talk) 16:13, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Inter Milan

I find the comment that I "just blanked" something to be rather unjustified in regards to the above named comment. If you read the edit summary, I stated that I was attempting to do a page move, as per closure of a WP:RM. However, upon attempting to get the move to be completed, I noticed the page F.C. Internazionale Milano was semi-protected and therefore I couldn't complete the movement actions. I had notified an admin of this, so that they could complete the move on my behalf, as well as made a note on the RM closure of this. Please make sure not to prejudge that an action an editor has done is bad natured, without checking the edit summary. Thank you, Wesley☀Mouse 22:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I not judge your motives. I judged the results. That said, desiring a page move is not a valid excuse for blanking things. Sorry. Pages should (almost) never be blanked on the project. The only cases where blanking is generally acceptable is for attack pages or copyright violations. Neither of those applied here.

The message you saw is my standard, cut&pasted message when people blank redirects. It is designed to say that the blanking was not a proper way to handle things, and direct them to RFD, which 99% of the time is where they really should have gone.

In the future, if a redirect is blocking a page move, add a {{db-move}} to it. That'll get an admin's attention without any need to create blank pages on the project. - TexasAndroid (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh thank you for that. I'll bear the {{db-move}} in mind and add it to my useful tips section. I would like to point out though that I was in no way using the page move as an excuse for page blanking. I am fully aware of blanking policies, the page move was my first ever attempt at such actions. And I learnt a few things from the errors along the way. If a person didn't encounter errors at some stage, then there must be something wrong, as nobody is 100% perfect in what they do. Its part of life, as my late mother use to tell me. People do things, and learn from what they do, gain skills from the mistakes they make. Anyhow, it has been nice having a brief chat with you, hope you have a wonderful weekend. Take care, Wesley☀Mouse 13:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Ball_deep

Hello,

Just thought I'd say hi and let you know that I fully understand why you deleted the page :)

However, do you feel with a little more content, it could be a viable page?

Thanks, Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crunchysnails (talk • contribs) 10:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible? Yeah. Is it likely? No. In order to get a proper encyclopedic article you would need a lot more details than just enough for a dictionary definition. And you would need Reliable Sources to establish that the use of the term is even notable. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)