User talk:MrScorch6200/2014 January

January 2014 Conversations (post at the bottom please):

on the subject of "Game grumps" deletion

The reason for creation was to make a redirection to the GameGrumps page as it's merely a different form of spelling, I'm sorry if I did anything wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monotar (talk • contribs) 18:31, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy deletion declined: Anant V. Narlikar

Hello MrScorch6200. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anant V. Narlikar, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: there is enough assertion of significance here to pass the low bar of [[WP::CSD#A7]]. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 21:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I putted references that you asked for the page Delia_Noble. Thank you! Italgeo (talk)

Thanks! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 22:46, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Arianna Bergamaschi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• presenter Italian . She recently became famous after her latest release with [Pitbull (rapper)]], which is [[Sexy People (The Fiat Song)]].

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:43, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Please see the warning on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to BP Logix, Inc. may have broken the syntax by modifying 7 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kalidas (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Ara]]'') and directed by his former assistant, [[H. M. Reddy]] for the banner Imperial Movietone). P. G. Venkatesan was chosen to play the title role.<ref name=INDIAGLITZ/> [[L. V. Prasad]], (who

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bounce(Timbaland song) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{Infobox single
• | Last single = "'''[[Throw It On Me '''"<br /> (2007)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:47, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

 – (all)

speedies and tagging

The use of speedy deletion is restricted to those circumstance listed as WP:CSD, the the conditions are interpreted literally and narrowly. I have decline all three of your deletion reasons for Hamed Ebadi. first, it not only does indicate importance ,but being an IEEE fellow is normally considered as proof of the much higher standard of notability. Second, it is descriptive of his career, not entirely promotional beyond the possibility of normal editing, so it does not meet G11. Third the definition of a test page does not in the least cover something that makes any reasonable attempt to be an actual article. The article needs rewriting, but we would probably accept it if it came to AfD.

First Cuban rafter is not a satisfactory article--it probably fails nNOT NEWS and BLP 1E. But these individuals and this particular event are not covered in the general article you listed, so A10 does not apply. I've listed it for WP:PROD.

As for Arianna Bergamaschi , see what I did with it.

There are also some problems with your tagging. It does not help to place every possible tag that might apply, since many of them duplicate--tagging is intended to indicate where improvement is needed, and it is enough to indicate the key areas. For example , with Marcus Blake (author), the lack of links, lack of lead section, and lack of sections are trivial. what is important is what you did not say, that he is an almost unknown author; I've listed it for AfD .

There is no sense in placing both the tags for COI and autobio on the same article, as you did for Shamar Stewart. Nor is the tag there for list format appropriate--a list of films or TV shows is generally presented in a list, and should not normally be presented in prose. DGG ( talk ) 04:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Mr. Pettersen's article

We are the staff assistants to David Pettersen. Could you please assist us with the issues regarding Mr. Pettersen's page? We feel he is notable enough to have a page now, and in the future as he pursues more advanced options. Please let us know if we can provide additional information to you.

That would be a conflict of interest. Please read that page and see your talk page. Also, I have tagged the article with the {{coi}} tag. You should also read the notability guidelines. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which will automatically insert your username and date. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 04:35, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

What can we do to bring it up to code? Mr. Pettersen is committed to allowing freedom of speech and the freedom for others to write freely about him on his page. We are posting factual, unbiased information. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 04:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

All you need to do is make sure you are following those two policies. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 04:43, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Excellent! I have reviewed the policies and feel that we align ourselves to them. Would we be able to have the "alert" or "tags" removed from the page at this point? We actually reviewed a lot of those policies before we posted the article. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 04:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I went head and added the "additional sources" tag; as long as a good, reliable, secondary source is added it can be removed. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 04:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

As long as you remain a major contributor, the COI tag should not be removed. Also, you should know that Wikipedia articles are not owned. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 04:51, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Which other reliable source would you require? We already have his website and Greenfield NOW article. Thank you for your assistance! We appreciate it. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 04:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice that at first. You're sources are fine at the moment. Sorry for the confusion. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 04:54, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

That's completely alright! We understand. Wikipedia is confusing, at times. We hope that we provide the most reliable and factual information. Of course, we welcome outside writing from other people to his article. Thank you for the help. We look forward to all of his tags being removed if and when another article writer comes along that is not the major contributor and adds/makes changes on his article. We thank you for your assistance! CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 04:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome; if you need any further help ask me here or any other editor on their talk page. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 05:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Could you please help us get the article back up? The reason the person removed it is not sufficient enough. Please elaborate. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

You should read this: WP:A7. That is the criterion the article was speedily deleted under. You should also contact the deleting administrator Slon02. The article has actually been created/deleted six times under A7 since 2010 (here is the deletion log). --MrScorch6200 (t c) 21:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

User:CoffeeDrinkers, given your intent to recreate it, I am protecting it against re-creation. Every admin who has seen it has deleted it. DGG ( talk ) 22:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

No wonder why people never donate to Wikipedia. Who said we were trying to recreate it? We are trying to resolve the issue. Could you reconsider? CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:08, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

You explicitly asked it above, "Could you please help us get the article back up?" If the article/subject does not pass the criteria of an article (mainly A7 for this article) then it cannot be placed into article space. It would be helpful for you to read WP:YFA. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I have reviewed and read that information over and over again. Is there a more senior writer/editor who could assist us? Would the page EVER be able to be created again, should someone else try and create it years from now? CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, let me elaborate.

I should also add that we believe that there is sufficient, factual information on Pettersen's notability in Policy A7.... CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Plus, how has info about him been written six times? He just became a candidate for school board this year. Deletion of a page three or four years ago has nothing to do with the present. We were not aware that articles were written about him back then. (If they even refer to the same person.) CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

The seven administrators that speedily deleted the page all deleted under the A7 criterion. They feel that the article meets the aspects of that criterion and subsequently deleted it. If David Pettersen becomes significant, the article could be re-created (also the re-creation protection would have to be lifted). Right now Mr. Pettersen is not a significant person such as Chris Christie. If Mr. Pettersen does have a claim of significance in the future, he could warrant an article. Not everyone can have a biography on Wikipedia. If I, for example, was the President of the Board of Education in my township that still would not warrant me having an article. If the admins unanimously agree that he does not have a claim of significance, that is almost like a last say in a situation like this. If you look at the deletion log (here is the deletion log) it shows that the article was created/deleted seven times. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:26, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Who wrote the articles from 2010 and 2011? We don't understand that. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I am also unsure; an admin will be able to tell you. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, can we please have what was written in the article that we just published yesterday (for future reference)? CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Ask any admin to add the content to your user space or sandbox. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

How do I go about doing that and speaking with an admin? CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Just ask any admin on their talk page or place the {{admin help}} template on your talk page (like you already did) and one will be in contact with you shortly. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:39, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm an admin, and have been one for six years now. I already commented above. This is not going to be re-created, and any further protests here will be considered so unconstructive that I will consider blocking you for it. Looking at the earlier articles ,it is very much the same person, at even earlier stages of his high school career. I have blocked re-creation for 5 years. Even if every does get elected to the school board of a small school district with 3700 students , he will quite certainly not be notable. If you want to help WP, contribute on notable topics in your area, like the many members of the earlier Wisconsin legislatures who do not yet have articles.

If you are not him, perhaps the logical conclusion would be that you are a schoolmate trying to make fun of him by inserting a totally inappropriate article. When people do that, we block them. DGG ( talk ) 02:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

MrScorch, if there are any further postings here from the same user, please ignore them. You've done fine, and have done all that can be expected. . DGG ( talk ) 02:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

We do apologize. We are not "schoolmates" of David Pettersen, nor is this him, himself. Thank you for your time. Once again, we apologize and we can confirm that we are not the same person who wrote the previous articles. Like we may have said before, we are definitely assistants of his, and we will not write anymore about him within the near future. CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Would we still be able to receive the previous articles written about him? CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Ask DGG or Slon02. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! We found it interesting that someone else had written articles about a different David Pettersen. The Pettersen we wrote about was never an anti-bullying advocate or author, as an administrator said was the case before. We thank you for your time - and we are disappointed that some editors were very vicious on accusing us of being "schoolmates" sent out to "make fun of him" or inferring that we are Pettersen, himself. Wikipedia is apparently a dysfunctional place. Ha! (Just kidding) CoffeeDrinkers (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

A cupcake for you!

here you go Vinnyboy08 (talk) 17:33, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 22:49, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Too-speedy speedy tagging

Hi. Thanks for patrolling new pages, but you are being rather too quick. You tagged Почему пропал звук centos 6.5 only one minute after it was created, and Seriy kim after only two minutes. While attack pages and copyvios need to be tagged at once, for A1 or A3 pages you should wait at least 10-15 minutes to see whether more appears. New users often put in a few words and then click "Save page" to see how it looks: it is discouraging and BITEy if a big red speedy notice immediately pops up. See {{uw-hasty}}. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

on the subject of "Wildwood_Enterprises" deletion

I've updated the Talk page with what I was aiming for, I'm happy to add more to the page but I didn't get a chance to do it all today! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OQZYwD0R (talk • contribs) 01:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi MrScorch6200. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Henry Miller (IBEW), a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. I did a search and found that he was someone of some historical significance. - MrX 23:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for adding a claim of significance. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 23:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

on the subject of "Diego Pardo Amado" deletion

Hi MrScorch6200. I just want to let you know that I contested your speedy deletion of "Diego Pardo Amado" since the page already exists in the Galician version of Wikipedia and my intent is to have it translated into English. The translation is even more necessary since the person has started teaching and lecturing at the University of Oxford in the UK. Please restore it as soon as possible so that I can continue to work on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oantony (talk • contribs) 13:22, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Excessive warning

Why did you give a {{uw-create4im}} warning in this edit? Although the user had created an article that was inappropriate, it wasn't so inappropriate as to deserve a level 4 warning based on her first edit. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you read that page? To me it seems absolutely ridiculous. It's also kind of weird that I thought someone might call me out on this. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Since you don't agree, and removed it from her talk page, I posted a level 2 warning instead. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:29, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Of course I read the page. But it was just a typical "my best friend is so cool" biography, the kind we see almost every day, not the sort of thing that deserves a Level 4im warning. Level 4im warnings are supposed to be "Assumes bad faith, very strong cease and desist, first and only warning. Generally used in the case of excessive or continuous disruption from a user or specific IP" (see Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/Usage and layout#Multi-level templates for vandalism). I agree that Kaley McKinnon deserved speedy deletion and that User:Elyse cz was properly notified of that, but I wouldn't even have gone to a Level 1 {{Uw-create1}} warning for an article creation like that, particularly given that it was the user's first edit to Wikipedia. I mean, if somebody's first edit was to create a biographical article that was libelous and falsely accused a person of serious crimes, I could understand giving them a Level 4im warning for that. But not for a "my best friend is so cool" article. Don't bite the newcomers. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't call a (most likely) single purpose account a newcomer, but I will listen to your advice. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 20:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

on the subject of Tiphany Adams deletion

Hi MrScorch6200. I just want to let you know that I contested your speedy deletion of "Tiphany Adms". Tiphany Adams is a reality television personality who has starred in 2 seasons of the critically acclaimed docu-series Push Girls. Push Girls won the 2013 Critics Choice Award. Two of her co-stars on the series currently have Wikipedia pages and Tiphany is referenced on the Push Girls page. Please restore the page as soon as possible so that I can continue to work on it. Meeting Well manages Tiphany's speaking, public appearances and sponsorships. Sarah Galbraith Laucks, Meeting Well

Resolved

on the subject of Sylvia Klimaki deletion

Hello, MrScorch6200. Regarding your message for deletion of Sylvia Klimaki page, I am not sure what to do. Sylvia is a living person, journalist and anchor woman to a very big TV channel in Greece. What kind of reference may I insert? Thanks Toninak

Hey Toninak, references for BLPs should be good, reliable, secondary sources (something like CNN) that support your claims. You can read WP:REF for a better idea. Don't worry, you have a week to insert a reference to that page. If you need any help just ask me here! Good luck and enjoy editing! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 21:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Sign your talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~) which will automatically insert your username, time, and date. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 22:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Tania Zikvashvili

Hi There are different forms of username block, and the milder ones, {{uw-ublock}} and {{uw-softerblock}} actually invite the user to set up a new account with an acceptable username. User 8ight capital Asset Managment was blocked with uw-ublock which specifically says "You are welcome to choose a new username... and continue editing," so Tania was quite within her rights to set up the Tania Zikvashvili account. There are obvious COI and notability concerns, but this isn't sockpuppetry, and I have closed the SPI. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy deletion declined: Tzin Tzun Tzan!

Hello MrScorch6200. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tzin Tzun Tzan!, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. Thank you. GedUK  12:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Special gift from me :)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

For stopping me resolving disputes :P --Mdann52talk to me! 13:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Haha... yeah, sorry about that. I was trying to scroll on my phone while viewing that edit (to see who added himself) and it froze when my finger was on the [rollback] button. Also, thanks for the big red mark on my face. :)

P.S. Good luck with the case! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 19:53, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Michigan

Thank you. If I hadn't stopped editing to go to dinner, that would have been me. WQUlrich (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. I still don't know why Kevinrexheine threatened me with reporting me; I don't think he knew that I was reviewing and not just plain editing. We definitely could've talked things out. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 20:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

He's already been warned about starting edit wars, so... WQUlrich (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that yesterday. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 00:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

The reason that I got upset about it, was that your review was tossing the entire edit, and not just the questionable paragraph. (I said as much in my comments during that "argument.") What you don't know about that earlier edit war was that I was vindicated as being in the right. (In fact, I don't start edit wars unless I know I'm right in the first place.) Kevinrexheine (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Do you even know the edit warring policy? You can't edit war if "you're right". The reason I tossed the edit is because I was following reviewing policy and removing unsourced BLP additions. The article has Pending Changes protection for a reason. Technically you are in the wrong. My advice to you: don't edit war under any circumstances. This is starting to turn into a rant. Good day. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 16:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Franziska Huhn

So isn't it a reference if I include a url to a website? Or should it be a web address? I'm really new to this and trying to figure it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkestgirlohyeah (talk • contribs)

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about; please tell me which page you are referring to. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 00:09, 10 January 2014 (UTC

)you proposed the deletion of my page Franziska Huhn.you said it was a biography of a living person and needed a reference. How do I do that?

You can read how to do that efficiently here. You also need to know that references are good, reliable, secondary sources. CNN is a great example of this. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 00:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Regarding the Deletion of Brunelleschi: Age of Architects

Hello, thank you for your time and attention. I believe I have found and cited a secondary source which demonstrates notability. Please let me know if this is sufficient to prevent the deletion of the page. --AesopMatt (talk) 19:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Regarding the Deletion of Mateo frazier

Greetings MrScorch6200. I appreciate your tagging the above for speedy deletion. As you can see the surname was not capitalized. I'm sure there was a better way to remedy. Alas, I'm a wiki rookie. I would sincerely appreciate a review of Mateo Frazier If you're in need of further references please let me know. Be well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuevosoul (talk • contribs) 21:23, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey Nuevosoul, the best way to remedy that page was for you to move it to "Mateo Frazier" instead of creating another article. Since you didn't create another, I tagged it for CSD. Also, it it seems that you are still working on the current page; when you are done I will be sure to review it. Regards, --MrScorch6200 (t c) 21:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the info. Page complete for now. Would like to add more media references eventually. Variety, Hollywood Reporter articles etc. and a picture, Just wanted to get it started for now. Again thank you. Publicists charge an arm and a leg to submit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuevosoul (talk • contribs) 21:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Yo Mr. Scorch. Don't be a wiki Nazi--How bout some help not just control????. Some very rudimentary searching on google turns up many many references to MATEO FRAZIER. Examples: <http://variety.com/2012/film/news/grindstone-picks-up-thriller-blaze-you-out-1118061557/>
<http://www.deadline.com/2012/11/american-film-market-roundup-day-3/>
<http://variety.com/2011/film/news/keyes-touche-ignites-blaze-1118043410/>
<http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-exec-alicia-keyes-touche-240106>
<http://filmguide.sundance.org/film/13944/drunktowns_finest>

I thought Wiki was about working in cooperation. How bout some HELP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuevosoul (talk • contribs) 23:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, you should add the references to the article then. Don't worry, you have seven days to get at least one in. Read WP:REF for help. If that page is too confusing or you need more help, I am here for you.

P.S. Please sign you talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~), which will automatically insert your signature and time and date. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 23:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Would you be willing to include the ones I shared with you above. I would appreciate the help. Nuevosoul (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Sure. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 23:33, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Nuevosoul (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Of course, you're welcome! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 23:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

You're welcome

And thanks for the "thanks". -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 19:23, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Adoption

thanks, I'd almost forgotten about my adoption request. I'm not sure how to respond so have posted this under your comment on my page, also to your talk page. I've been editing away and picking up the basics, but it would be great to have an experienced editor whom I could consult - so yes, please adopt me, whatever the formalities are.

I'm based in New Zealand, am a retired IT consultant, and regard my self as a generalist rather than an expert in a specific domain. One area I've taken some interest in is football (soccer) and I've noted that English football has more than its share of illiterate articles and opinionated editors. I've done a bit of cleanup and disambiguation too, but not very systematically.

One question I have - how does one search for a character string in the text of an article? The Help says that a key combination such as Ctrl-F should do it, but it doesn't on Firefox which I use. As an example, for disambiguation, it's clearly desirable to be able to find the ambiguous word or phrase without reading through the whole article. Chrismorey (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Daneek Miller

Hello, I've added the references you requested to Daneek Miller from his official NYC Council bio and a major NY political news source. You sent me that at 16:46, 12 January 2014. -- Stoke987 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoke987 (talk • contribs)

Resolved

re: John Brent (disambiguation)

Hey there. I realized the error I made there after making it, and I left a message with an editor who has helped me before here: User talk:Lectonar#John Brent. I asked him a bunch of questions there because I was pretty confused with the process. I'm sorry about the mixup here! Thanks for helping me out. --MyNameIsJason (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I moved Jonathan Brent from the "See also" section up to the "... may refer to:" section to prevent the disambig from being deleted. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 00:59, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! This is becoming a more complicated issue than I thought! Haha. --MyNameIsJason (talk) 07:46, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Speedy deletion declined: Lu Rodriguez

Hello, MrScorch6200! Apologize for my shortcomings in the page, is that he was tired and off until tomorrow ... Sorry ... I'll try to edit it later ... Thanks and Regards ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alatzar (talk • contribs) 03:53, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

message

i had a wiki account about 3 years ago but it was deleted because the name was inappropriate. it was called "fxuxcxkxyxoxux" or something like that (if you take out the x's its "fuck you"). i tried making another account after but it said it wouldnt let me. i got a new computer last year and made this account --B1189199429080823K (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for being honest. How long did you have your other account? --MrScorch6200 (t c) 21:59, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, you are a liar and were blocked indefinitely because you are a sock puppet. I retract my statement above. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 22:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Crypt of the Necrodancer

My problem has been solved. Thank you for your time. --Luveluen (talk) 09:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Adam Anouer page proposed for deletion

I'm sorry if I haven't responded in the correct manner; I am very new to the word of Wikipedia. I hve added a reference to Adam Anouer's IMDB page to my entry yet there is still a notification that the page will be deleted. Do I need to do more?

Cheers Sapphonica (talk) 12:33, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

DRN - Logan's Run

Just a quick note that you just added a comment that seems to be out of sequence chronologically and sort of hides my own comment. I'm not sure whether that was your intention or not. DonIago (talk) 19:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

It was intentional, but I'll move it below yours. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 19:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I would have been fine either way, just wasn't sure whether you were aware. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 19:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

DRN

Nick, rather than fill your talk page with stuff, please see Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Coordinator assistance for background. I'm hoping that you will pick back up on Devyani Khobragade incident and maybe start Chikungunya. I started to jump in on both of them, but if I'm going to be gone or mostly gone for the next four days I don't want to stir the pot and then walk away with it still on the burner. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I'll head over now. Cheers, --MrScorch6200 (t c) 16:31, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Speedy deletion declined: Lovejoy Mansion

Hi MrScorch6200. Just to let you know, I did not think that this one met criteria for speedy deletion. It's designated as an historic site and designed by a notable architect. Also, I think it's a bit of a stretch to consider a house an "organization". Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Mail

You've got mail. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Margherita College speedy deletion

Hello MrScorch6200, just let u know that I am the owner of Margherita College Website and i am new to Wiki. So please help me in the way you can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mca.ashim (talk • contribs) 03:18, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

You are going to have to be more specific than that. Being the webmaster and creating that article is also a conflict of interest. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 00:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

control.cards Speedy deletion nomination of JS Automation

Hi~ My page JS Automation was been deleted. Please help me how to do to get it back. Many Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Control.cards (talk • contribs) 03:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

regarding the speedy deletion of "Health Beauty Life" page

Help a girl out, please! :) You've decided to delete the page I just created, Health Beauty Life...how can I stop this from happening? I was enlisted by my employer to create this page, having never done this before, and I'm not sure what I've done wrong that's causing the deletion (Actually, I'm not quite sure what I'm doing at all - ha!). I would love some feedback so that I can resolve this issue, and have a posistive report for my boss! THANKS MUCH! :) User Name: HBLMag — Preceding unsigned comment added by HBLMag (talk • contribs) 21:13, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Regarding closed DRN Request

Dear MrScorch6200,

I understand and respect the recent decision to close the DRN for Dharmachakra. I would however like to mention that the intention was not forum shopping. There was no resolution on the RSN (which I do remember participating in) or RfC (not sure if we had one)--that's why I had to seek DRN. I had opened the DRN request to avoid a continuing edit war. However, since it's closure, the other parties began reverting again, without any request for discussion. Rather than edit war, I thought it best to seek your recommendations. Please advise on course of action. Thank you. Regards, Devanampriya (talk) 00:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm very sorry for accusing you of forum shopping. Generally, an RS/N and especially an RfC takes time to go through their own course of action. I would recommend an RfC, though there has already been one according to you (in the "Have you tried to resolve this previously?" section). If the RfC wasn't initiated or failed due to lack of participation I recommend trying that first. As long as the dispute isn't under discussion at another noticeboard, you are welcome back to DRN. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 00:18, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Tagging of HappyBird

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on HappyBird. I do not think that HappyBird fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because There is plenty of context -- the current stub tells you what it is, much less the cited refs. As for A7, if the article stood alone this might fit A7. But an article with a cited source that looks reliable is often a poor target for A7, and when the cited source has plenty of information to indicate a claim of significance, perhaps even to establish notability, there is no business tagging for speedy delete.. I request that you consider not re-tagging HappyBird for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 00:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I disagree, I tagged it as A1 because the first sentence talks about a company, then the second a device, without showing clear relation between the two. (It's another one of those 2-in-1 articles I've seen lately). The A7 tag was iffy as there's not much of a claim of significance, but re-thinking about it I agree with you. I am going to re-tag as A1 for obvious reasons. If you or another editor still disagrees with the A1 CSD, I will be happy to discuss it on the talk. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 00:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

No, it's pretty clear that it's just talking about the device: the company that makes it is called "Angel Digital", according to the first source. Think of it as saying "an Australian brand of consumer electronics", much the same way that one might say "Dial is a brand of soap." It's not talking about the company that manufactures Dial, it's talking about the product itself. Not the clearest choice of words, perhaps, but we don't speedily delete for that; one does need to put in at least a little bit of effort to understand what the article might be trying to say. However, that's not to say the article doesn't have problems; both sources are worded identically or nearly so, and based on this, they're both basically verbatim reprints of a press release that was put out by the company, so neither count as a reliable independent source for the purposes of notability. AFD is probably the way to go here. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:30, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

If there is enough info in the article for a motivated editor to find out, possibly with Google, or indeed with library research, what the article is about, sufficiently well that the article can be expanded if sources have the info, then it has enough content and is not subject to WP:CSD#A1. This has been discussed at WT:CSD. Also, when a speedy tag has been reviewed and declined, please do not replace it without discussing the matter first. DES ^(talk) 00:42, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Oh, by the way: your sig

Well, I'm not a fan of the yellow highlighting; it's pretty distracting. But that's just my opinion, so no big deal. The real point is that, per policy, you're not allowed to transclude templates in your signature. (Also, having so many newlines in it can make pages that you've signed difficult to edit by increasing the clutter of the source page.) No big deal; the set of signature policies is a pretty byzantine one, but please do change it to remove the template, at least. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I know, I'm fixing that now (just changed it today). --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 01:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, cool, thanks. Yeah, you didn't need to transclude something to do what you wanted anyway. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:02, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I actually have it substituted: --Regards, {{SUBST:Font color|blue|yellow|{{SUBST:User-multi|User=MrScorch6200|separator=dot|1=t|2=c|doc=yes}}}}, so no need to address the transclusion concern. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 01:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Status of Wikipedia:Citing IMDb

You promoted that WP:ESSAY to be a WP:GUIDELINE without mentioning that in the editsummary. A change like that really needs discussion and consensus, and at the very least to be advertised rather than hidden. Someone on the talkpage even noted that there maybe even had already been a proposal to promote it, and there was not enough support to do so. I undid the promotion. Feel free to start/continue discussing on Wikipedia talk:Citing IMDb (or some other relevant place). DMacks (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Please see what I just posted on the talk page. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 02:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response! DMacks (talk) 02:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes sir! --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 02:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Bitcoin DR/N

Thanks for the note. Per your suggestion, I have filed a DR/N for Bitcoin. I am open to any advice or assistance you can offer. Thanks and best regards. -- HLachman (talk) 04:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I see that the DR/N (in relation to Talk:Bitcoin#Intrinsic value debate) was closed. I also see that the other major party in the dispute has ignored a third-party's proposal for how to achieve consensus-building (e.g., work out a draft on the talk page before making edits), and has proceeded to make unilateral edits that directly conflict with some of my stated positions, and without any third persons expressing their views on the points of disagreement. I feel that this is at least a case of not respecting the consensus-building process, and possibly also qualifies as "disruptive editing". I have noted on the Talk page that I strenuously object to what is happening. May I ask for your advice on the following points?

• How to stop activity on the article that is disruptive to the consensus-building process currently underway (preferably reverting the recent edits in conflict with that process, but without edit-warring).
• How to get the consensus-building process to continue and succeed.
• How to get others, specifically those with expertise in economics (as I see that to be the key subject of the material under discussion) to contribute to the discussion.
• Unless you feel it is unwarranted, how to get help with what I consider to be a user conduct issue, and what "next steps" I can take in that regard. I have just posted a copy of my Talk page "strenuous objection" to that user's talk page. If you are an administrator, and if it is an appropriate "next step" to "Ask an administrator to evaluate the conduct of the user", then I am asking you now to do that.

Thanks again for your help in this matter. I'm open to any advice you can offer. -- HLachman (talk) 13:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The edits you are referring to are almost always considered disruptive. I left a note on the article talk sternly directing all editors to not edit the disputed material until a consensus is reached. My suggestions:

1. See above and below
2. Attempt to steer the other editors in the direction of a consensus. Remember that compromises will and must be made on all of your parts to get something to agree upon.
3. Request an WP:RfC or ask a user in that field to help you out
4. I am not currently an administrator. If there are any other edits to the page that you believe are disruptive to the consensus-building process, formally warn the user. The next step would be some form of administrative action. I would recommend that you ask the other editor to revert his own additions instead of you doing it and possibly get hit with an edit-warring block; I'm sure an admin would consider those types of reverts from you as AGF but do not break the 3RR.

I have one question for you: Was any editor involved in this warned for edit warring, are editwarring, or broke the 3RR? --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 20:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I see that you posted a Caution on the user's talk page, thanks.

• "Was any editor involved in this warned for edit warring". That same user's talk page is frequently blanked, but I see in the revision history that there were two Warnings (disruptive editing and 3RR) on 28 Jan., both for Bitcoin. I don't know what edits or what parts of the article were involved, but I do know that both Warnings were issued less than a day after the user reverted one of my edits (this was the REVEXP that caused me to create the "Intrinsic value debate" section on the Talk page and solicit opinions from others).
• "ask the other editor to revert his own additions". That request was included in my "strenuous objection". I prefer that the section is reverted, but I won't do it myself unless it's made clear on the Talk page that I'm allowed to do that (so as not to appear non-compliant to the other participants).
• "If there are any other edits... formally warn the user". There have not been edits since the one I "strenuously objected" to (which was actually a quick series of 4 edits), so I guess my objection on the user's talk page counts as one formal warning. Prior to that, I had complained to the user about non-consensus edits only on the article's Talk page.
• The user responded to my "strenuous objection" on my talk page, falsely claiming not to have done any edits following the proposal by the 3rd user to hold off on edits. I posted on the user's talk page that I reject that claim (and added that it's a big waste of time). I felt offended by that, and this incident only reinforces my interest in getting administrative help. If we're at a point where I can take a "next step" on that, again, please advise.
• "WP:RfC". OK, I'll look into that. But I'm unclear that this is the right time to do it. I'm reluctant to bother people by dragging them into a totally dysfunctional consensus-building process.

Thanks again for your help in this matter. -- HLachman (talk) 22:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

Angus Deayton at WP:DRN & WP:ANRFC

The naming case at WP:DNR has been archived. Nobody has replied at WP:ANRFC (There are over 1000 admins, one of them must be able to summary a discussion). What do we do now? Narrow Feint (talk) 12:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I still want to wait on the WP:ANRFC; maybe you can personally ask an admin that you know to review the discussion. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 20:35, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved