Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

User talk:Panyd/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enjoy and remember to keep smiling!

A welcome back kitten!

[edit]

I trained this kitten all by m'own self to spread its paws and welcome you back to wikiland with a hug. Happy to see you here again and feeling better!

A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome back cupcake for you!

[edit]
Guaranteed non-fattening, totally sugar free. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome back jar of pesto!

[edit]

Fluffernutter already sent you a furry animal, and Elen already sent you a sugary pastry, so I figured I'd send you pesto. It makes just about any panini better, and now it's yours. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

[edit]

Withdrawal of a DYK nom

[edit]

Hi,

I'm wondering why my DYK nom, Template:Did you know nominations/Armageddon Holocaust, was rejected. The edit summary said "nom has indicated that they would withdraw". The withdrawal was from the April Fool's section of DYK. If you still think that the nom should be rejected, that's okay, but I want to make sure that there is no confusion.--¿3family6 contribs 12:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! My apologies for the confusion regarding the withdrawal. However, we unfortnuately as a rule (assuming this hasn't been completely disbanded in my absence) which states that problematic nominations which have not resolved their issues in more than seven days will be rejected. That appears to be the case here. If I've got it wrong, please let me know and I'll be happy to put it back in. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It looks to me like this nomination was never properly reviewed, so it shouldn't be rejected. There was just one person questioning the hook, an issue that was subsequently resolved, but it's still waiting for that initial full review. Under the circumstances, an un-rejection (is that a word?), perhaps with one of those new symbols added to the bottom of the review to indicate that someone needs to review it, would probably be best. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So what should be done?--¿3family6 contribs 00:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've just reopened the nomination in Panyd's absence, and put the "review again" icon in it so people can see that it needs to be fully reviewed. With luck, a reviewer will appear soon, but even if not you should eventually make it to the main page in a set of DYKs. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Adding: you'll want to add your own new, preferred hook as soon as possible, so the reviewer bases the review on that hook, and not on the ALT3 you were planning to replace. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop loading DYK prep areas immediately!

[edit]

Unfortunately, you're loading up the open prep areas, and the last three will need to contain the yearly April Fools hooks, which are sequestered in another area. So the last three prep areas are going to need to be used for these AF hooks. The more you load now, the more will have to be moved around later. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear God I didn't look at the dates. BIG apologies. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure the people who know AF will be able to handle it. I'm still relatively new, so I don't know precisely how the AF loading is supposed to work, but I wanted to say something as soon as possible. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Nader

[edit]

Hi Panyd, Looks like a little oops above. I have made my fair share of well intentioned mistakes too :-) But I digress.... in 2010 you were gracious enough to give a peer review of the article Tony Nadar. Unfortunately none of your recommendations to improve the readability of the article were acted upon. I'm there now, by myself, trying to clean it up a bit and I would really appreciate your guidance. One point that has come up is the subject's medical degree, which you had issues with in your review. Would you have a moment to look at this talk page entry of mine and give an opinion? I would be very grateful to you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:23, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

[edit]
refreshing spirit
Thank you for your refreshing ideas (missed when you have to be absent), such as attracting new users to contribute to DYK, and for your unrewarded activity "behind the scenes", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kasim Aga Mosque

[edit]

Hallo Panyd

I saw that on saturday you loaded my DYK on the prep area, but your edit has been reverted. What will happen now? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 09:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(watching) see above, some hooks had to make room for April fool's specials. It looks to me as if yours just has to wait to be promoted again, I see no other apparent problem, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fooled by the Fools :-) OK, danke! Alex2006 (talk) 05:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

[edit]

Help with DYK

[edit]

Hello, I am leaving a note here because I've noticed you working with DYK nominations. I have never done a DYK before, but I have nominated this one. For various reasons, I need to leave the wiki for a while, but I hate to leave something up in the air like that. If this nomination doesn't qualify or whatever, I am fine with that. I am just hoping that someone can help to move it along. If you could offer any feedback, that'd be appreciated. Thank you. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 19:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Hope that helps and thank you for submitting a DYK :) PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's up now, thanks for all of your help. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 00:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK image protection

[edit]

I try to protect images on Commons, which you can see in the header when click on "edit" - this might save your time when updating the queues, i.e. usually there is no need to upload locally, unless there is a need for a crop or other image tweak. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 13:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I shall try this. I was under the impression that as I am not an administrator on Commons I couldn't protect anything there. Thus it saved me having to ask someone else if I just moved them. We shall experiment and journey into this new realm... PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah no, not like this - I protect them on Commons :-), but I might miss some files, which you can check by clicking "edit" on the Commons filepage. Materialscientist (talk) 14:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I get cha. Yay teamwork. Thanks for pointing that out. Will save a lot of faffing about. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:26, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Risky Business (Joel Goodson)

[edit]

You just placed the speedy delition tag there and you deleted the article in few seconds. This is not fair, you should know the reasons for the article, there was no fault in the article. There are many articles of character out there, so why did you delete only this ? --Napsync (talk) 15:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. So, let's make a few things clear. I did not put the tag on there, but I did delete the article. It would be improper of me to tag and delete the article myself. However, let's look at what went wrong here. Firstly, the article did not contain any information or add any significant details on the character in question that weren't already available on the main article Risky Business. You'll notice that when we do allow for character articles, they tend to be rather in-depth and the characters themselves have a wide cultural impact outside of the universe in which they live.
Secondly however, the language you used in the article is not encyclopedic. Using 'horny' as the main adjective to describe your protagonist is not a good start.
You are free to recreate the article at any time. However, before doing so I would suggest that you look at other Wikipedia articles and consider using the Article Wizard when creating your next article. If you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to ask. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 15:49, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey You

[edit]

I love you. The Cavalry (Message me) 22:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys - get a room! Actually thx for the best wishes and kitten .... I'm currently keeping some conspiracy hunters intrigued on line - so its nice to have a sane view too. (Although still silly at times!) Victuallers (talk) 00:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

[edit]

Could you please swap the hook for Rocher Rond in the DYK prep area for the alt one here? It seems more interesting or unusual. Thanks, --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Although for future reference, please do put your preference in the nomination page. I'm sure the reviewer will concede to your judgement. Also, be bold! You can chop and change anything you want in the prep areas. That's what they're there for. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. I thought that the prep areas were protected, like the queue, and never bothered checking.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 17:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hannah Kempfer

[edit]

Hi Panyd. Could you take a second look at the DYK for Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Kempfer? I had an initial review that I got back to within a few days. Then it sat for a while until another reviewer came along. After the second review, I addressed some lingering issues the following day. I thought I had left a note there, but seem to be mistaken. Would you consider reopening it? Gobōnobo + c 19:22, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. Just make sure you leave your message soon lest someone else close it. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Gobōnobo + c 23:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of deleted article

[edit]

Panyd, is there anyway I can get hold of a copy of Aryanna Strader which you deleted after an AFD in case she would happen to win the election. Thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 23:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of deleted article

[edit]

Panyd, is there anyway I can get hold of a copy of Aryanna Strader which you deleted after an AFD in case she would happen to win the election. Thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 23:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. You can now find it here. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. Go Phightins! (talk) 20:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Places of Dragon Prince

[edit]

Hi, could you reconsider this closure? It seems to me that consensus is to delete the article. A merger was proposed by only one person who recommended "delete or merge". And as the content is unsourced, it should not be merged in any case.  Sandstein  08:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given the brevity of input on that AfD I wouldn't argue from consensus but given the lack of secondary sources I have to agree with you. Changed. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!  Sandstein  16:27, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]
Best Wiki Fan Site
Hi Panyd. My name is Brian Houston. Forgive me if I've got this wrong. But it seems you're the administrator on behalf of the Wikipedia page about me. Could you advise if this is the case. Its just I'd like to update the photo to a more recent one. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks Brizee77 (talk) 10:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you very much for the trophy but I fear you are rather mistaken. Anyone can edit your page which means you don't have a dedicated administrator. Also, you'll see I've removed your email both from the above and the history of this page. Please don't publish it. Thar be spambots on the horizon if not worse. Having said that, it's easy as pie to update your image. You can either use our Upload Wizard, which will guide you through the process, or you can email our permissions queue who will verify that the copyright holder has released the image and upload it for you! Hope this helps but if you need anything else please do contact me. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Panyd. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Lewes Road.
Message added 17:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– hysteria18 (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK picture hooks

[edit]

I've noticed that you've been filling up the available picture hooks in the DYK prep areas. Unfortunately, this excludes others from having the opportunity to make such selections. As an example, prep 3 currently has only the picture hook filled out, with seven unfilled regular hooks, yet you just now filled the prep 4 picture hook with a hook that could just as easily have finished off prep 2. Perhaps you could give others a chance at that coveted slot going forward? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you'll forgive me for not being very good at politics (even DYK politics). I have no idea what you mean by coveted slots. I put the picture in prep area 4 because it was finally approved, having been put in here in February. I thought it deserved to be on the Main Page as soon as possible. Also, I am very much of the opinion that we need variety in the types in images that are displayed and twas time for a black-and-white white man again.
Is that not ok? The problem I always see when I come back from a break is that the Queues are all empty and the prep areas are sparse. Not only that but people get hammered to hell when they miss something. I hear the same two things over and over again. Either: "I'm too scared to put anything up in case I miss something and the FA crowd kill me" (obviously they won't but I see where people are coming from) OR "I didn't know I could put things in the Prep Area!"
I'm big on disabusing people of these notions but I'm also really, really big on having everything filled as much as possible. The longer something is in the prep area the higher the chances of something spotting an error etc. etc. etc. - Is this not ok?
Confused. Not very good at human interaction. Possibly deceased. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think I may be the one not good at politics. My apologies. You've been doing fantastic work keeping the prep areas loaded and moving into the queues, and we're finally in good shape. I wasn't thinking of this as a political issue at all.
My thought on the pictures is that it's nice to be able to pick one every once in a while, and it seems only fair that people populating the prep areas don't get ahead of the game by filling up the pictures in more than one otherwise empty prep area and only then proceeding to the other slots. There are far more pictures than slots to fill them (and the ratio has gotten worse as we've gone from six to seven and now eight slots per), and many are quite deserving. I agree that it's important that there be a balance in types of pictures, just like there should be balance within each prep area—avoiding sequential sports hooks, or US hooks, or people hooks, etc. Your black-and-white male might have been passed over for a different guy or gal by someone else, but that happens; conversely, I've seen pictures I thought were wonderful never appear because the hooks were snapped up by someone else to fill the imageless third slot in a prep area. (I try not to do this myself, to give the picture another chance at being seen and chosen.)
We seemed, before your return, to have fewer admins moving prep areas to the queues than we had people filling up the prep areas. Times when we even had a majority of the queues filled were infrequent. I'm one of those who have moved cautiously in becoming someone who works on the prep areas, but figure this is a good community and if I inadvertently make mistakes they'll get fixed by others. (Two recent hooks received further editing after I promoted them.)
It is indeed good to have hooks in the prep areas for a while so more people can fix them. Once they're in the queues, the pool is limited, and means going to WT:DYK rather than just fixing it yourself. For a while there, errors were making it on to the main page because we couldn't get them fixed fast enough. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kushagra_Bajaj

[edit]

Just notifying you I do not think it was repeatedly recreated, as I moved it to capitalise the last name. Thanks! --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Kushagra bajaj was created on the 28th, the 29th and today and in every case was a copyright infringement. I will salt the other page as well just to be safe. Thanks for letting me know though. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, on the DDR (dup. dect. rpt.) it said 2 words were the same last time. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:20, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I declare you to be correct...and accuse you of witchcraft. Restored and unprotected. Thanking you. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heheheh. (There goes my evil laugh again...) --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hang on a second... if we're going by this duplicate detection report, then it appears to be being tripped up by some funky code on the blogspot page - notice the length is listed as "4 words". If you compare them manually they are identical. Unless this is reverse copying, it certainly looks like a violation to me. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 20:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, there isn't a single sentence in the article that is not a copyright violation - it's word-for-word identical to kushagrabajajgroup.blogspot.se , so I have re-tagged it. I haven't used the duplicate detection report, but the fact that the text is identical is easy to spot by plain ol' reading ;-) --bonadea contributions talk 20:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No respect due I assure you. Hopefully fixed now. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Foswiki_(2nd_nomination)

[edit]

Please reconsider your deletion of the Foswiki article! Did you check the new references that were added after initiation of the AfD proposal? Following the discussion there was no clear consent to delete the article. All the "delete sayers" did vote that way before the addition of the new sources. And none of them took into account (or questioned) the sources which support the notability of Foswiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.206.111.79 (talk) 22:27, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Me too :-)

[edit]

Until this morning, I didn't care that Foswiki was a redirect to TWiki, but now I'm just trying to get to the bottom of how notability works at wikipedia.

A whopping 21 references were added - including 2 books, an article from a peer reviewed journal, and a number of conference proceedings - in an attempt to address the concerns which prompted the AfD in the first place...

... and yet there's not a single scrap of feedback about those references, their applicability/quality, or how far the collection goes to addressing (or not) the notability concern.

Only two comments (that weren't from outsiders/Foswiki people) were received after those references were added:

Do you have time to provide some feedback on those references? I'll poke User:Spartaz as well.

Csirac2 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:03, 1 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Actually, User_talk:Spartaz implies that contacting this person is not a possibility, so I won't.

Addendum: Sorry, didn't see the anon comment already here regarding Foswiki's AfD. I merged my section with this one. You have a busy talk page!

Csirac2 (talk) 12:19, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is busy. I forgot what happens when you spend a day tinkering around. There are quite a few sources in the article that have trivial mentions at best (even those that were added) and given that consensus is judged by the weight of the arguments + reality as it stands it seemed like a rather obvious delete. However, having sifted through almost all of them (and that took some doing), you're right. I hope you'll forgive me this. I'm new to difficult AfDs but really wanting to help out in that department. Thank you for making me take a second look. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:53, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Panyd, thank you for spending your time with reviewing the set of sources! I (and I think a lot of other wikipedia users) appreciate your work and also the outcome of the discussion very much! May the "Considered for deletion notice" in the Foswiki article now be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.206.111.79 (talk) 18:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A question about the DYK setup

[edit]

Hello, I have a question about the way DYK is run. It seems that items are added to prep areas until that list is full, then that list gets moved into the queue, then onto the main template, then into the archives. What seems strange to me though, is that these lists seem to be cut-and-paste moves (maybe this is wrong, the whole thing is a little confusing). Wouldn't it be simpler for everyone, not to mention better for history, if these lists were created as subpages? Instead of cut/pasting, they would just be transcluded in the new area, each with a self-contained history? This is how most things like this are handled on WP, and it wouldn't be hard to set up. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that the technical abilities aren't there, it's more a question of personal responsibility. A while back DYK had problems with copyright infringement or plagarism (which is why you see the valiant efforts by NikkiMaria now). There were serial offenders in that regards and people who were not checking the articles thoroughly before pasting them into the Prep areas. Now, if someone is prolific in their mistakes, that person can be taken to one side and (politely I hope and pray) be told what's going wrong.
Similarly, it's not that the list gets moved when it's full, but rather when it is full and has been sitting in the Prep Area long enough for the community as a whole to re-check the hooks there for errors. Nobody is infalliable but as a team we can try and get as close to that happy state as possible. This is one reason why I try and fill the prep areas as quickly as is responsibly possible. The more time we have to review articles and catch mistakes, the better it is for everyone.
Hope that makes sense, but if not, shoot me another line. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:57, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This does make sense, but I'm not sure if you understood what I was suggesting. Specifically, instead of putting the hooks directly into Template:Did you know/Preparation area 2#Hooks (leading to massive page histories), the hooks are put into a subpage like Template:Did you know/Hooks 05-01-2012 (or whatever, arbitrary name). This subpage would look exactly like Template:Did you know/Preparation area 2#Hooks, and the subpage would be transcluded into that section. So it would look and function the same, but each batch would have its own history. When that batch is ready (the same timeframe as now), that subpage is no longer transcluded in the prep area, and instead is transcluded in the queue. Then it is transcluded in the main template, then in the archive. The benefit would be the clear history, and that interested parties can watchlist their hook from start to finish. Hopefully this makes sense. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 17:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It does, it does. Although I don't know enough about the intricacies of A) people's opinions on the matter and B) the technical feasibility of that. May I suggest you ask the wider DYK community? Sounds like a good idea to me, but someone might have a good objection to it. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 17:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I am still learning about DYK, so I wanted to make sure it made sense before I made a proposal. I'll post something at Wikipedia talk:Did you know (as that seems the proper place). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 17:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

[edit]

UFC 143 is deleted!?

[edit]

But why? There was no reason to get rid of it! Glock17gen4 (talk) 06:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made my closing rational quite clear here. I understand that many people are passionate about this subject, but as an outsider weighing the arguments there was a clear consensus to delete which was firmly backed by policy. Of course you are free to change these policies, or alternatively, you can take this AfD to Deletion review where other members of the community can weigh in on whether or not I made the right decision. Either way, I hope that you and the others who voted in the AfD understand that much as you may feel I was mistaken, there was no malicious intent behind the decision to delete. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 17:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's getting a bit ridiculous. All but 3 of the keep voters in that AfD were likely SPA's. See this. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 16:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please activate Kushagra bajaj profile page.

[edit]

Hi Panyd,

I've created a profile page on wiki. Page title is "Kushagra bajaj". you have deleted page because of Unambiguous resion. Now public domain owner give me the permission to use the text. Owner added following text. "re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0"

I am requesting you to please activate our page.

Please see the below urls. http://kushagrabajaj.weebly.com/ http://kushagrabajaj.com/ http://kushagrabajajgroup.blogspot.se/

Thanks & Regards, Amrish Tyagi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amrishtyagi (talk • contribs) 09:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! That's awesome! Well done! I've unprotected the page now, so you can add whatever information you would like back into the article. Although for the sake of being in-line with our guidelines, please recreate it here. Also, you will probably want to "Wiki-fy" the text somewhat to make it more encyclopedic, otherwise there is a chance of it being speedily deleted. I would suggest you use our Article Wizard, which will guide you through the process step-by-step.
Hope that helps but if you need any further assistance please do not hesitate to let me know. Well done again! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 17:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

H-13 DYK

[edit]

Can you add Dough4872 to the credits? He's the one that found the new hook so that the article could be re-promoted at DYK, so he deserves some credit too. Thanks, Imzadi 1979 → 21:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 15:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obama Eats Dogs

[edit]

Thank you for your decision of delete for the Obama Eats Dogs AfD. I think it was very good that you gave an explanation of the reasons for deletion. Debbie W. 16:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be amused at Sean Medlock's take on your close here. I note that he didn't give attribution for the image. Gobōnobo + c 07:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where are the reasons for the deletion? 08:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.195.154 (talk)
The discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obama Eats Dogs. User:Panyd did not participate in the discussion, she tallied the results (heavily in favor of deletion) and acted on them. If most users had voted to keep the article, it would have been kept. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 09:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Close JohnnyNinja but not quite. You'll see at the top of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obama Eats Dogs it says the consensus is to delete and why. That's a summary of what arguments were used by those in favour of deletion. It doesn't matter how many people vote one way or another. It just matters what arguments they use and how in-line those arguments are with established policy. Hope that helps! (P.s. unlike the U.S. of A Wikipedia is not a democracy) PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Madam, it's JohnnyMrNinja, of the Connecticut MrNinjas. And I meant no insult to your closing abilities, I was tired and had already reverted vandalism to your page twice, I was trying to prevent more. Your page needs a night watchman. Also, the US is a democracy? Interesting theory. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 16:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're famous today. [1] and several more. Rklawton (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They all appear to be copies of the original. But yay! Maybe there'll be cake. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great close. Bearian (talk) 21:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

George Bandy, Jr.

[edit]

I agree that it asserted significance, but I put a prod-blp on it for lack of references. Then I looked at what the author said on the talk page, and Googled. I've now tagged it CSD copyvio... Peridon (talk) 20:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really wasn't hinting - just informing. But ta anyway. Peridon (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for correcting me

[edit]

I had previously been living with the assumption that the muffin is subtle, but I now see the error of this. Moswento talky 12:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're joking or making a sarcastic dig at me... (AGF though) thank you? PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I assure you my motives were genial; no digging was involved. Take care, Moswento talky 13:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A cupcake for you!

[edit]
The muffin is not subtle, but she is scrummy. Thanks for your work on DYK, particularly toughing it out on the Justin Bieber on Twitter article! Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK noms recheck

[edit]

Panyd, there are a couple of DYK nominations that you found problems with that have been edited to address the problems. Can you please take a look at these and see where they stand? Thanks!

—BlueMoonset (talk) 02:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

[edit]

Hey Panyd,

thanks for reviewing List of members of Teylers Eerste Genootschap! Getting a speedy after a lot of work of making an article is always a bit unnerving so I was relieved to see it was kept this way :) effeietsanders 11:11, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfolded film

[edit]

Hi, I'm sorry, one must of put the above on the wrong CSD setting. One was meant to place the article on the test edit deletion section. Thanks -----Chip123456 (talk) 15:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Karan Atwal

[edit]

Hey mate, I noticed that you went against my deletion of Karan Atwal and while I still hold the opinion that it should be deleted I will again put it up for deletion via PROD. I just want to tell you the reason why and that is that while the article states that Atwal has played a match for Mohun Bagan there is no proof that he has, the link given is a dead link and playing for United Sikkim also does not help as Sikkim played in the I-League 2nd Division which is not fully-professional which is a requirement for notability as per W:NFOOTBALL. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think those are all very good reasons to consider deletion via PROD or AfD. Unfortunately A7's criteria for inclusion are very low. The claim that he played for a fully professional club is a reasonable assertion of significance (i.e. he's not saying that he is king of football, wearing the golden cheese hat, and allowed to use David Beckham as a footstool for his crimes) and as such I declined the speedy deletion. I hope that makes sense/is reasonable in your eyes. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, ya thanks for funny reply and yes I understand. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 19:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Happy 10000 edits! Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whoooo! Thank you! Only took me 5 years... PanydThe muffin is not subtle 10:05, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ISP Security

[edit]

I wouldn't say it's wrong to decline the speedy, but if the same page is speedy-able in any other namespace then, as a 'G' criteria tagging, it should be speedy-able in AfC space? I don't generally go around AfC submissions CSDing advertisements, but I make an exception for stuff that includes full contact details and seems non-notable — I don't envisage this submission ever being 'acceptable'. Perhaps too much time in AfC has made me cynical... Anyway, just thought I'd mention my rationale. Pol430 talk to me 22:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

[edit]

A Muffin For You!

[edit]
Muffin
Thank you for advising me of the Don't Bite the Newbies Policy. I will try to be more careful in the future! The muffin is not subtle, but it's delicious! Cheers! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 01:33, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outline of Bahá'í Faith

[edit]

Hello. I was wondering why you deleted this page. I know it was tagged for an A3 speedy deletion, but it seems to have content. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My interpretation of A3 with regards to this article was that it is almost entirely made up of a 'See also' section. The page is nothing but links to other pages with a small paragraph at the beginning which does nothing to add to the subject matter as we already have an article covering the subject in more depth. I don't see how this qualifies as content in its own right. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 18:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the way all the "Outline of..." articles look. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:56, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've never seen one of those before. Surely that's what portal templates are for? Regardless, thank you for informing me. Shan't make the same mistake twice. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 09:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN discussion of a block you lifted in October, 2011

[edit]

Hello Panyd. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Application to End Topic Ban. You are welcome to give your own opinion on whether Eric1985's unblock condition should be lifted. EdJohnston (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asian Seminary of Christian Ministries

[edit]

Due to my mistake, I did not realize what actually happened:


Page was nominated for speedy deletion as per G11 by Σ.


You deleted it.


W.bayola instantly recreated it again.

I mistakenly thought Σ had forgotten to put the speedy deletion tag, but turns out he did.

Hmm, I am at a loss now. If you could tell me what to do I would be very gratified. As I am not an expert in that field, I cannot fix the article myself, but it appears to be in need of a complete rewrite, that or just another deletion.

θvξrmagξ contribs 16:04, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just PRODed the article. I can't find any sources to make it pass WP:GNG which means there's very little to do in way of saving it. Was very naughty of W.bayola to recreate it thrice but they appear to be a single purpose account so they probably don't know the rules at all. We'll see what happens. If you can find any sources to support their notability though, that would be excellent and would mean the article could be rewritten. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 10:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ufc 143

[edit]

Did my math fail me or are there more keeps? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/UFC_143

care to explain the deletion? KING GRIM LOL YO WHATS UP (talk) 23:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your math didn't fail. I will repeat myself for you:
The result was Delete - As has been discussed below, the article fails WP:SPORTSEVENTS, most specifically because it is not A game that is widely considered by independent reliable sources to be notable, outside routine coverage of each game, especially if the game received front page coverage outside of the local areas involved (e.g. Pacers-Pistons brawl or the Blood in the Water match) (emphasis mine). The article also fails the criteria set in Wikipedia:MMANOT. Looking at the sources and the arguments below it also appears to violate WP:PERSISTENCE. For those voters who appear to have confused consensus with vote-counting, please see this, which clearly states that consensus is achieved by balancing the weight of an argument rather than its existance. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 15:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please assume good faith. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 23:21, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

[edit]

I have 7,500+ edits and 80+ pages. When do you think a good timeis to applying for adminship. Wilbysuffolk Talk to me 18:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My oppinion: WP:NOTNOW. Also, could you read my talk page and reply there. Also, please use {{cite web}} templates on pages, not just bare urls. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

[edit]

Question re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daylight saving time in Germany

[edit]

Since you closed it as merge (which I support), could you add to your closing comment what should we do with the non-Europe articles I mention? Is the merge applicable to them as well, or should a new AFD be started? If the latter, I don't have time to do so, I am afraid. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 16:19, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there was enough discussion of the wider issue in the AfD to warrant declaring a larger consensus. However, I've put that on the AfD page now and suggested that if the other articles are put up for AfD the discussion should be noted. Hopefully for consistency someone will have time in the future. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:15, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reconsider Deletion of Shobiz Experiential Communications

[edit]

Hi Panyd, The page of Shobiz Experiential Communications, was deleted today after an AFD. Would it be possible for you to reconsider the deletion, as it is pretty popular events agency and could perhaps be the first in India. Unfortunately, as with AD agencies, they are rarely mentioned in the news, unless it is for some awards or a news related to the events industry, which is rare.

It is a valid organization and while I was a prospective employee, the absence of a wiki page caused a lot of inconvenience in gathering information about them.

Their official website can be visited at www.shobizexperience.com


Ashhar.ahmed (talk) 10:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Unfortunately, though I understand that it is difficult for an events agency to garner press on its own merits, unfortunately claims to notability must be verified by reliable sources and in this case they were not. There were press releases and trivial mentions of the company used as references but these are not reliable by our standards.
However, if you would like a chance to re-write the article, please just let me know and I will transfer the deleted article into your userspace so that you can update it. Hope that's helpful and if you need anything else please just let me know. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Panyd/Archive_8&oldid=1189658344"