User talk:Decltype/Archive 8

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/95jb14

Hi again, decltype. :) I finished your closure of this RfA. There are pretty detailed directions available at User:EVula/admin#RfA_closure, if you are interested. :) I hope that your day has gone well. Warmly, –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 03:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I looked at that to find those templates to put at the top and bottom, but got stuck at the second item in the list :). I am not particularly interested in closing things, so I never tried to learn it properly. Thanks, I had a very nice day, and I hope you did as well. Regards, decltype (talk) 06:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

By the way, did you happen to misspell "closure" or is that a valid alternate spelling? I may not be particularly fond of closures, but I'm very enthusiastic about closures :) Regards, decltype (talk) 06:27, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Haha, thanks for catching that. I had originally wrote, "I finished your close of", but decided "closure" was more appropriate, so I just added "ure" at the end. That's what I get for editing whilst tired. :) –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 19:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Decltype. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re:Email

From the e-mail I wrote: Hi Katerenka, given the explanation on your talk page, I am very curious as to your identity. Seeing as how I have no right of knowing, I am still wondering if you would be willing to answer a single question. Namely, "Did you have any interactions with me at all under your former username?

Not that I'm aware of; at least, nothing substantial that sticks out in my memory. –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 09:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I see, thanks. I take it from your answering here that you do not mind this being on-wiki. I have therefore decided to post an excerpt from the e-mail above to provide context. In retrospect, it'd probably been better if I had asked on your talk page in the first place. Regards, decltype (talk) 12:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I find that it is best to keep as much on-wiki as you can, for transparency's sake. I hope that you are not offended that I posted a response here as opposed to emailing you. Rest assured, if it had been something private in nature, or you had requested it, an email response would have been sent as opposed to my responding on your talk page. –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 19:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

No, I figured, since you started under a new name, that you didn't want to draw attention to your old account. If you do not mind it being on-wiki, then I certainly don't. It was the right thing to do. Regards, decltype (talk) 21:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I tend to think that it's rather obvious that I'm not "brand new", so I have no problem confirming that that is true. :) I would rather not disclose my previous account for privacy reasons, but the people that need to know of the connection do know. :) Thank you for your understanding and kindness, –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 21:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay.

i was just wondering, that's why i was doing it in the sandbox. thank you. 150.250.92.97 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay. decltype (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

96.233.153.11 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Block needed, but no-one at AIV. Thanks in advance, --aktsu ^(t / c) 08:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done decltype (talk) 08:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyrighted Article Deletion

Hi, I'm fairly new here and not really good with computers. I have created an article about Western Beef Supermarkets and it was deleted. I'm going to start a new article only on what I know about the supermarket and other users can add on to it. Checkmatechamp137 (talk) 18:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Checkmatechamp137

All right.. Is there anything I can help you with? decltype (talk) 18:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Added a comment on your talk. decltype (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: Cleanup article

Thank you for cleaning up my Western Beef article. I really appreciate it. I forgot to sign this comment 5 minutes ago. Checkmatechamp137 (talk) 19:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Checkmatechamp137

Debra schepp

Hi. In the article Debra schepp, which part of it do you feel is an assertion of her significance: "Debra Schepp is an author" or "She co-authored 17 books" or "the first was published in 1990"? To me these are a set of unremarkable assertions about her, none of them implying notability. There's also the listing of several of her books, but none of them is a title I recognize and I don't see that any of them is implicitly notable, let alone that any of them confers notability on her. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:49, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I do feel that having authored 17 books is at the very least, an indication of significance / importance, and enough to disqualify the article for speedy deletion under criterion A7. I therefore think PROD or AfD would be the right course of action, that is, unless notability can be established. Regards, decltype (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Anybody can author a book, or a dozen books, or a hundred books—and have all of them wind up on the 60%-off table. So I don't agree that this is a primary indication of notability (though it's also not something I have any intention of making a big deal over). —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I consciously use the terms "importance" or "significance" rather than "notability", because articles need not assert or indicate that their subject meets any of the relevant notability guidelines to pass criterion A7 (this is a common misconception). "Importance / significance" is a lower standard than notability (in the WP sense of the word), and A7 is only intended to eliminate articles where there's absolutely no indication of it. As long as there's a credible claim of importance/significance, a different process should be used to pursue deletion, even if the subject doesn't seem to meet our guidelines for inclusion. Regards, decltype (talk) 12:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Decltype. You have new messages at Kiwiteen123's talk page.
Message added 07:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks! kiwiteen123 (talk) 07:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Replied. decltype (talk) 07:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Juli-files

Dear Decltype, thanks for your prompt reaction concerning Juli-files. I see that you also corrected the page at some points. Let me add a few remarks to that page:

1. There is no such thing as the archive of Hungary. There are several archives, each having a specific name.
2. The article claims, without reliable, actually without any source, that a certain bribe took place in Hungary at a certain period. I am not a member, or even a supporter of the party MSZP, but this is something which lead to legal action in probably less than 5 minutes after some leader of the said party discovers this article.
3. Neither Gyurcsany, nor Horn have ever been presidents of Hungary, they were presidents of MSZP.
4. Antal Apro, was not father-in-law, rather grandfather-in-law of Gyurcsany. He died in 1994, so probably has not been very active recently.
5. The main claim of the article, that state-owned apartments were given to eminent or promising politicians at nominal prices, is an outrageous lie. Yes, several hundred thousand flats, i.e., all state-owned apartments were given at a very, very cheap price to the then tenants, but this had nothing to do their being politicians. Those, who were among them politicians (e.g, Viktor Orban, see [1]), could do this, because at that time they lived in the state-owned half of the Hungarian apartments.
6. This article contains a ridiculous, unproved, blatantly false claim. It should be removed immediately. If somebody some day carries a proof or realiable source, I would be more than happy to re-create the page. Kope (talk) 08:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I see. I considered whether the article could be said to constitute a blatant hoax. The newspaper articles led me to think that it was more of a conspiracy theory, which does not fall under the criteria for speedy deletion. I therefore think the correct course of action would be to remove all poorly sourced or unsourced non-neutral information from the article, and let the PROD run its course. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Message

Your a heavy handed nobody. I really dont care what you do or how you go about it, your not worth the hassle. It is clear to me you are in the pay of plentyoffish.com and other sites that you somehow deem "notable". I take it you have forgotten how wikipedia got to it's status in the first place then? It certainly won't be going far with heavy handed people like you. I hope you have a nice sleep and get some things off your chest because i have done nothing wrong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swelsh23 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page. decltype (talk) 01:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Your userpage

Hi there decltype. I think you need to scale back the opacity on your userpage to 50% or something like that, currently the first part of the page is very hard to read with the background image. Regards SoWhy 13:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Ach, you are probably right. I experimented with different images and opacities to find a combination that would make the text readable without making the image too blurry — I'm sure those FP contributors would hate seeing their images desecrated like that :). Also, the placement of the text relative to the image will of course vary based on resolution and possibly other factors. May I ask what browser and resolution you are using? Anyway, thanks for letting me know. Regards, decltype (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm on Firefox (3.6 nightly) at 1680x1050 but the problem persists in smaller windows as well since the "Hi, I am decltype (pronounced /dɛkoltɑɪp/)..." text has the darker trees as a background. With the change to 50% the text becomes easily readable again though :-) Regards SoWhy 21:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, great. The picture thing was actually intended as an experiment with the opacity feature more than anything else. I'll probably stick with it for a few weeks until I grow tired of it. Michael J. Lowrey puts it nicely: "Quiet good taste is the key. Once I learned to avoid that, I could find a look that worked for me." :) decltype (talk) 12:30, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

Decltype ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Brenden Adams

Please add the article of Brenden Adams.

Brenden Adams born: September 20, 1995 height: 7'4.6" location: Ellensburg, WA, USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.210.152.57 (talk) 08:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The article was deleted because it did not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. If the subject is indeed notable, you may request that someone create this article for you at Articles for Creation. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

MWICPS‎

Hi there. I saw an IP tagged this for speedy deletion and you removed the tag. I don't often get involved in deletion and COI discussions, but this particular entry and its principal editor User:Matthew wright has me a bit concerned and seeking advice. I was thinking of taking the article to AfD and wanted an expert view. Can you comment, either here or at my talk page (or the article talk page if you think that more appropriate). Ta. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll reply at your talk. decltype (talk) 07:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Jenny Was a Friend of Mine

On November 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jenny Was a Friend of Mine, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks Victuallers (talk) 01:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

WT:ACTOR

Hi. There is currently a discussion here regarding the use of navbox awards templates for Razzie Awards that partly includes the "Worst Picture" template related to WP:FILM. Your comments are very welcome. (P.S. Please note I am not canvassing. There seems to be a lot of regular contributors currently absent from Wikipedia and all comments are needed.) Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nah, that's fine, I was going to comment in that anyway. I'm opposed to the usage of those templates, and I'll make a statement to that effect in the near future, probably this evening. Regards, decltype (talk) 09:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Somer

Firstly, I would like you to read WP:NOTNEWS, and consider what that means. We do not have articles on every horrific murder or every innocent victim.

Secondly, I would like you to consider the sort of discussion which often takes place in heated AfD discussions. Consider that this murder took place barely two weeks ago.

You may wish to transwiki this content to Wikinews, though. DS (talk) 00:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Replying back at your page. decltype (talk) 06:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Decltype. You have new messages at Ilyushka88's talk page.
Message added 13:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Ilyushka88  talk  13:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

re:Johan Andresen

Hi Decltype. My work on it was not wasting of time. I enjoy the newpages checking and I consider it as a very enlightening and interesting experience. It is a kind of travelling for me, as I can see the stream of articles from all parts of the World, all possible topics and variants of human manners. Searching for sources and judging notability is an excellent and sometimes very difficult rebus to resolve. Thanks for your kind words. Have a good day. --Vejvančický (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Btw, I replied also at WP:NEWT. --Vejvančický (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I am unsure which communication style you prefer, so I'll reply at your page. decltype (talk) 16:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Righteous Sock Barnstar
		Awarded to Decltype for meritorious socking at WP:Newbie treatment at CSD :) ϢereSpielChequers 19:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the project. It's been a very interesting experience participating. decltype (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Let the Right One In (film)

I was going to suggest if you are a fan of this then buffing it up to GA or FA and I see that it is already done. I read the book first - might be an interesting one to improve to make a Good Topic. Apparently there is an American remake on the cards....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I have created or rewritten almost all the articles supporting this one. And as a matter of fact, I did create Let Me In yesterday :) decltype (talk) 19:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

RE

Sorry about that it was a false positive.--Coldplay Expert 19:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I see. In general, my advice would be "if in doubt, don't nominate for speedy". As you know, we have other processes for dealing with pages that are not uncontroversial candidates for deletion. Regards, decltype (talk) 22:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ready Georgia DYK Hook

Thank you for pointing out the improper usage of the second person in my hook for Ready Georgia's DYK nomination. I have corrected the problem by simply shifting all second-person instances to the third person. Please let me know if you have any more suggestions. Leeatcookerly (talk) 14:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, that's probably the simplest solution. I have verified the hook and given it the checkmark. Regards, decltype (talk) 14:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)|

Clairgnosis CSD nom

Sorry, this article had been deleted twice before, but by CSD and not AfD. I mistakenly nominated for CSD under the 'prior AfD' category. I've posted a nomination to AfD now and will let it run. No reply necessary. Thanks, Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 07:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, noted. It is a common misconception that G4 can be applied to pages that were previously speedily deleted or PRODded. No harm done. Regards, decltype (talk) 07:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Let Me In (film)

On November 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Let Me In (film), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 17:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Johan H. Andresen jr.

On November 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Johan H. Andresen jr., which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thea Gill

Hello. I found your name on the Biography Project member list and you've helped me out greatly in other matters, so I'm bringing this to you in hopes you can help. I saw several deletions by an editor to the subject article and was going to revert as the edits seemed vandalistic. Knowing that bios deserve special treatment I wanted to get some feedback before I blindly reverted the editor. I will contact the editor in hopes of developing a dialogue, but I do not know much about the subject of the article. If you could take a look when you get time and weigh in if you think it necessary it would appreciated. Regards Tiderolls 04:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, the editor seem to have made some bold changes, and was rightfully reverted. I see that you have attempted to communicate with the editor both on talk and user talk. As for BLP, I see no reason for concern, as the editor does not seem to have discriminated between sensitive (to some) information, and neutral information about Gill's career. I'll watchlist the article for now. You may want to solicit further input from the biographies of living persons noticeboard, but I do not see it as necessary for the time being. Regards, decltype (talk) 07:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your assessment. The BLP issues were my main concern. If the editor sees it necessary to continue their course I will approach the notice board, but I'm hoping the situation has achieved a bit of stability. Thanks again Tiderolls 11:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

<---It appears that User:Willthereeverbeamorning is claiming to be the subject of the article. I do not know how to proceed from here except to refrain from reverting until the matter is resolved. Should it go to the biographies of living persons noticeboard now? I'll watch from the sidelines until you think I need to help. Thanks Tiderolls 19:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I've posted to the biography notice board. I'm letting you know in the event you want to offer an opinion. Thanks for all your help. Tiderolls 22:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry I haven't been able to get back to you sooner. I see now that the article has gotten the attention of several users, and the user claiming to be Ms. Gill has been directed to OTRS. I'll make a comment on the noticeboard. Regards, decltype (talk) 06:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I will. Maybe I will... decltype (talk) 08:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Recall

No, he's just trying to catalog the AotR a bit better. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

So I understand. Well, I do think that sysops should be responsible for their actions, and have the trust of the community at all time. I believe my criteria reflect this. decltype (talk) 15:47, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

*The* internet

Thanks for the help with my English on my userpage :-) Anna Lincoln 08:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, Anna. I don't usually edit user pages, but I initially thought it had been vandalized. Then I realized what the user was trying to do. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Restoration request

Hi decltype, hope things are going well for you. If you have a minute some time, and do not mind, could you restore User:Javert/Honours and then move it to user:Katerenka/Honours, deleting the redirect in the process? I would appreciate it. Thanks :) @Kate (talk) 08:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be happy to. Things could have been better, to be honest, but I'll surely manage :) Regards, decltype (talk) 08:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I know that feeling. If you ever need to vent some steam, feel free to drop me an email -- I'm a pretty good listener. :) In regards to your quickness with my request, I appreciate it very much. Yours, @Kate (talk) 08:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the offer. Happy to help. Regards, decltype (talk) 09:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Suzanne Reuter

Hi decltype! :) The Suzanne Reuter article was speedily deleted a few years ago (which is strange, because she's one of the most famous actresses in Sweden). Is there any content worth restoring, or should I just start from scratch (I'm planning on creating a DYK)? Theleftorium 21:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Tja Henke! Yes, it was an incorrect speedy deletion, but no, I don't see any content worth salvaging. I'd just start from scratch or perhaps use some material from the Swedish article. Of course, that one is very short on sources, and may therefore not be very helpful. decltype (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! Theleftorium 14:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Brooke Hanna

That's fine, thanks for your work! Doc Quintana (talk) 13:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Notability (Music)

Are albums released on major record labels by notable musicians inherently notable? The reason I ask is that after reading WP:MUSIC, I'm left with two impressions. Namely that, albums still have to meet the general notability guidelines (coverage in third party sources, etc) and that "in general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia". I'm working on an article about one of Ruthie Henshall's albums but am having trouble finding reliable, third party sources. Is this album notable because it was released by a notable individual, or am I going to have to establish its notability separate of hers? Thanks and sorry for the tl;dr. ;) @Kate (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

My interpretation has always been that albums by notable artists are generally notable, but that they should have third-party RS coverage to warrant separate articles. Otherwise, the info about them should reside within the artist's article (unless it's too large), but as with any other notability guideline you will find plenty of counter-examples in main space. I'll gladly admit that I'm no expert, though. I seldom write about albums nor comment in album-related AfD's. I've always been under the impression that charting albums or albums with charting singles are notable, but the guideline doesn't seem to support this. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. decltype (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I appreciate the timely response. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to add the information to her article and piggy back off of her notability while on the side continuing to look for reliable sources to establish the album's notability on its own. Thanks again. :) @Kate (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and nice draft header by the way :) decltype (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, I'm not clever enough to come up with headers like that on my own, so I just steal them from people who are. ;) @Kate (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, there is no deadline^{link to essay needed}, after all. I had an article on a song sitting in my userspace for months until I could dig up enough sources. I did look for some for Pilgrim, and they are not easy to find. There's a few lines here. By the way, are you aware of any effort being made towards obtaining a free image for Ms. Henshall? decltype (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sources on this album are rather sparse (I appreciate the link you found, will check it out momentarily). I've only managed to dig up a few Amazon links as well as the artist/album page from her record label. In regards to a picture of Ruthie for her article, I've sent several emails to her publicist asking for permission to use one from her website in her article, but have yet to receive a response. I check Flickr pretty regularly in the hopes that someone has added one, but have yet to run across one. I'm rather tempted to hop across the pond and attend one of her performances to take one myself. @Kate (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think the widely reported 50% success rate for requests is a bit off. I have occasionally succeeded in getting flickr users to re-license their images, though. But I'm all to familiar with "the silent treatment". decltype (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding eligibility for speedy deletion per A7

Hello, Decltype

I'm calling in to ask for your opinion. Do you think the following Wikipedia articles are eligible for speedy deletion per criterion A7: No indication of importance?

• Update (Anouk album)
• Together Alone (Anouk album)

Thanks in advance.

— Fleet Command (talk),
07:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. No, albums are not eligible for deletion under criterion A7. If the article does not indicate importance / significance and the artist's article is a redlink or itself tagged for speedy deletion, then criterion A9 probably applies. However, Anouk is a notable artist, so A9 doesn't apply here. You may also want to see my conversation with Katerenka above regarding stand-alone articles for albums who may not be independently notable. Regards, decltype (talk) 07:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I see also from the main article that Together Alone was a #1 album in NL (4x platinum), so definitely independently notable. The same probably goes for Update, who also charted. decltype (talk) 07:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. But I was just wondering: Don't you argree that the mentioned articles fall within the criterion of WP:INDISCRIMINATE? I'm just asking because your judgment in this matter seems fair to me. Fleet Command (talk) 10:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

It depends. While I personally may not find such information particularly useful or interesting, I accept that the general consensus is that such track listings are proper, and should be included. When the artist's article grows too large, separate articles for discography and / or individual albums are created. This may lead to articles that in themselves are of low quality, such as articles for TV episodes that consist only of a plot, or mere track listings for albums. Now, I am sure that the Update article could be expanded with sourced info because the album was so popular. As for the other one...maybe less so, but I wouldn't write it off completely (it is a charting album from a popular artist, after all). I do not think my judgement is particularly fair in any way, though, since I'm just a single editor. That's why we have deletion discussions, after all; to determine consensus on whether such articles are appropriate for inclusion. Regards, decltype (talk) 10:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Re Wikiwikiwoowikiwoo indefblock

No argument with that! EyeSerene^talk 19:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS November Newsletter

The November 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Unspecified behavior

On December 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Unspecified behavior, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

SoWhy 15:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Skavlan

Thank you very much for adding the guest list. I completely missed your post on the talk page! Theleftorium 16:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I thought it would be useful to have in the article. decltype (talk) 16:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding recent edits to Black sheep (disambiguation)

Hi, decltype I don't know whether I'm doing a right thing to be bothering you on this issue or not. I might be extremely impolite to be writing about such a mundane thing to you, but I guess it is the better course of action. So, I hope you forgive if it is. Recently, when something mundane brings me to the borders of unchecked fury, I usually consult someone wiser than myself.

So, here is the case: Today, I did this edit to Black sheep (disambiguation) page with aim of making this disambiguation page comply with WP:D guidelines and best practices. (For instance, I removed pipes, since they are not allowed in a disambiguation page. This rule is even mentioned at the top of edit page of every disambiguation page.) Three hours later however, User:Dbachmann completely undid my edits, leaving the summary "fixing fix. Grouping a medieval tribal federation with a nickname for a US Marine Corps squadron is silly." This comment is of course, euphemism: He undid the edits completely not just those related to Marine Corps and tribe.

What do you advise me to do in these situations? If I undo his undo, then I have commenced an edit war. If I don't, the page is non-compliant with WP:D. I'm so angry now that nothing else comes to my mind (except two other solutions that are unspeakable.) Fleet Command (talk) 18:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Communication is key. If you are upset, just step away, instead of writing something you will regret later. What you should do is start a discussion, preferably on the talk page of the DAB, outlining the rationale for your edit, as you did here, and leave a talkback for Dbachmann. You could of course also approach Dbachmann directly. I don't know him, but I'm sure he's a reasonable person. But since you came to me first, I am going to take the first step, and notify him about this conversation. I do not like extensively discussing another editor's actions without them knowing. Regards, decltype (talk) 20:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

you would think that this is something to bring up on the article talkpage, or if necessary at the user talkpage of the user making the edit.

I would be interested in exactly what points the present version of the page is violating the sacred WP:D guideline. Pipes? Is that it? Pipes, as in

Black Sheep (novel)

I seriously hope this isn't it.

If it is, how about making a compromise suggestion of just removing the pipes and see how the other party reacts?

I am sorry, this strikes me as very immature. Decltype, would you please tell FleetCommand I said he is welcome to remove the pipes? Thank you. --dab (𒁳) 21:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Point taken. Yes, this discussion should have been initiated elsewhere, but the important thing is that it is resolved amiably. But before FleetCommand removes those pipes, I'm going to have to point out that those are in accordance with WP:D (as valid exceptions). decltype (talk) 21:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

:o

OH! MY! GOD! This is incredible, Administrator decltype, this is indeed incredible! I feel the world has gone crazy!

First

No, I don't mind that kind of piping. The kind of piping that I actually fixed was this, which now prevails after the undo:

[[The Black Sheep (novel)|''La Rabouilleuse'']]

It could have simply been:

''[[La Rabouilleuse]]''

Why point to a redirect page and then pipe that redirect page's name to the actual page name?

Second

I came to you for an advice to end the whole affair in a civil and extremely-peaceful manner because I had already since seen your very civic writing and I thought you can tech me how to be civic. But, dude, instead of just advising me, you ignited what could have been a Nuclear Edit War! I cannot believe that you really notified him to come here! Now, a Wikipedian is unwittingly offended – Exactly what I wished not to happen! Besides, he now regards me as an evil Wikipedian who has told him off to an administrator! (I didn't exactly intend to do that!)

Now I wish I was never born.

I won't touch that disambiguation page ever. I'm going to submit an apology to Dbachmann.

Fleet Command (talk) 08:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I would like to repeat what I wrote above: If you are upset, just step away, instead of writing something you will regret later. I'm sorry if you are offended by my actions. However, I fail to see how inviting the discussed party to join the discussion can be construed as "igniting ... a Nuclear Edit War". On the contrary, discussion is the exact opposite of edit warring. Since this talk page is fully visible to anyone, I am afraid you cannot expect information that you post here to remain private. There are other channels for that, as pointed out in my editnotice. While I cannot speak on his behalf, I am certain that Dbachmann do not regard you as "evil" over this minor issue. Because that's what it is. A very minor issue, a quibble, and I advise you to not despair over it. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you are offended by my actions.

Oh, no, dear friend! You did not offend! And I didn't mean it either! But I fear that Dbachmann is unwittingly offended.

Anyway, let's leave the whole matter now. What's done is done and it was my fault. Thanks for your help. Fleet Command (talk) 09:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

There's no need to place the blame on anyone. I'm happy that you consider the situation resolved. Let me know if assist you with anything, now or in the future. decltype (talk) 09:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Bakkels

What are Hjorte Bakkels? I really enjoyed Elling and the Art of Negative Thinking movies. I was less crazy about the Moods of Norway store on Robertson Boulevard, but I guess I'm a traditionalist. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Good question! I had to look it up, actually. I believe it's doughnuts made with hornsalt ("Hjortetakksalt", or "Hjortesalt"). I've never heard of it. Maybe the regular Norwegian doughnuts that I simply refer to as "smultringer" are also called "hjortebakkels". I'm not sure. All I know is that the salt smells awful. decltype (talk) 21:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it for me. I don't think it has to do with salt. Hjorte means horn? And bakkel is cake or pastry? ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure the salt is essential. "Hjort" means "deer". Hornsalt (or "hjortetakksalt") is called just that because it used to be made from the horns of deer. I'm fairly sure that this is what hjortebakkels takes their name from. I think pastry is the best translation for bakkels. So hjortebakkels = deer pastry, literally. My dictionary also notes that bakkels are often cooked in lard, like smultrings, but this is not universally true. Vannbakkels, for instance, are not. decltype (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)