User talk:Ged UK/Archives/2010/December
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ged UK. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Advice about The Spoony Experiment
I just have a question about the article The Spoony Experiment and as you closed its recent AfD I thought you might be the best person to ask. If it was moved over a redirect to Noah Antwiler (as the creator as well as a blogger/web personality/reviewer) and modified to fit, would the discussion in the AfD still apply? That is, would that be a valid article under WP:WEB as discussed for The Spoony Experiment? The article is still suffering from blanking and reversions and the move might be a way to resolve that. On the other hand, I don't want to create a new set of problems. I'm not familiar enough with the various policies to know if moving the article would make things better or worse. Can you help with this? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there, sorry for the delay in replying, I've been offline for a few days, then ill! If you want to move it, then you'd need to get the consensus on the talk page. The AfD was a keep in my view, that the content was notable, so redirecting away from that would be against the spirit of the AfD. Start a discussion on the article talk page and take it from there. GedUK 09:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 December 2010
- News and notes: ArbCom tally pending; Pediapress renderer; fundraiser update; unreferenced BLP drive
- WikiLeaks: Repercussions of the WikiLeaks cable leak
- WikiProject report: Talking copyright with WikiProject Copyright Cleanup
- Features and admins: Birds and insects
- Arbitration report: New case: World War II
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 13 December 2010
- Rencontres Wikimédia: Wikimedia and the cultural sector: two days of talks in Paris.
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Algae
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Election report: The community has spoken
- Arbitration report: Requested amendment re Pseudoscience case
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 20 December 2010
- News and notes: Article Alerts back from the dead, plus news in brief
- Image donation: Christmas gift to Commons from the State Library of Queensland
- Discussion report: Should leaked documents be cited on Wikipedia?
- WikiProject report: Majestic Titans
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Motion passed in R&I case; ban appeals, amendment requests, and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
You very kindly protected the page, and while I'm grateful, it seems the source I've been rejecting is legit. The source they were providing kept saying "couldn't be found by Google Chrome" whenever I clicked the link. When an editor I'm familiar with provided the same information, I endeavored to get through it, and found it simply wasn't loading via Google Chrome because the link contained the http://www. When I removed the offending pretext, I got through and verified the information myself. I'm big enough to admit I was wrong, perhaps a bit rash, and don't see the need to punish other editors for good information; I request a removal of the protect on List of Young Justice episodes. Thanks. KnownAlias contact 10:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Unprotected GedUK 12:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
DF
Thanks for the semi. 1/14 should be long enough for now. What about the guy's "enemies" list at the top of the page? Should it be zapped? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- Meh, it's not doing any harm (unless those people didn't actually add themselves to the second part, I've not checked). GedUK 12:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- No, I think the editor himself added them. I only raised this because one editor deleted himself from the list. I'm not on the list myself, so I'm feeling kind of dissed. :'( ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind, the user himself his now zapped them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- Case closed. For now. GedUK 20:48, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind, the user himself his now zapped them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- No, I think the editor himself added them. I only raised this because one editor deleted himself from the list. I'm not on the list myself, so I'm feeling kind of dissed. :'( ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Christmas Card
Heh, thanks! Happy Christmas! GedUK 16:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Andrew Peach
Please could we finalise this argument regarding Andrew Peach who has another protection due to vandalism. Please check his "discussion" page and remove the link regarding 5-Live. 82.41.235.103 (talk) 17:27, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- No, i'm not getting involved in a content dispute. Provided a source that refutes those reliable sources already provided. It's been made pretty clear on the talk page. GedUK 21:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 December 2010
- Ambassadors: Wikipedia Ambassador Program growing, adjusting
- WikiProject report: WikiProject National Basketball Association (NBA)
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Hello, Ged UK … Looks like at least one fanboy refuses to let Laagi Tujhse Lagan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) die … any help (such as WP:SALT) would be appreciated. Happy Editing! — 70.21.16.94 (talk · contribs) 14:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- I've restored it again, warned them and told them to take it to DRV. Have also watchlisted. GedUK 15:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thnx … the funny thing is that they keep referring to me as "unidentified ip" when my userboxes reveal more about my identity (including a link to my personal website) than their user page does about them. :-) — 70.21.16.94 (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to give a semi-uninvolved opinion on this. I ran into this while patrolling WP:REFUND, looked at the AFD in question and saw that I was the one who originally closed it. The discussion ran for 2 weeks and I closed it as "redirect" on the advice of the only !voter. However, I made it clear that it was an editorial decision on my part as one !vote is hardly a consensus. Therefore, I don't think it's appropriate to try and "enforce" that close. This should have stayed in the realm of bold revert discuss.
I personally have no opinion on whether or not Laagi Tujhse Lagan is notable enough for a standalone article but I think the best course of action is a second AFD. If Wyn9 thinks the subject is notable then let's give him his shot at proving it. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I have never watched this show but I know the show is popular enough for a page. And I am not a "fanboy" if administrators like you people fail to understand what should be deleted and what should be not then it is my job to correct you. What will be for you GED UK if I remove Doctor WHO page since it is not popular in MY country? Maybe Torchwood, Eastenders too? I have nothing against you but I want you to TALK with me and as for you 70.21.16.94 I fail to understand why you deleted the page in first place. If you basis stands correct then wikipedia will have few thousand perfect feature articles left and millions of developing articles should be deleted I presume?Vin99 (talk) 17:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- Have renommed. GedUK 20:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Glenmore Park (stadium)
Yeah, I apologise for the mistaken tag on why it should be deleted. Twinkle surprised me by pushing the deletion request through without a verification popup :) I would have picked a different reason for deletion. Thanks. Ccrashh (talk) 18:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC)