This is the twentieth page of my talkpage archives, dated late August 2006 into September 2006. Please do not edit this page. If you wish to leave a message, click here! :)
Hello. Could you please read this conversation ? I think the problem raised exists and can be resolved easily, but the people that seems to be members of this project only answer by logical fallacy (and by aswers that can be considered as insults). I believe I have not the sufficient level in english to participate to this debate. It could be great if you read it and tell what you think about it, or just tell me here if you found nothing abnormal. Thanks Markadet fr 09:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, since the last time I saw it, the conversation seems to have changed in the right way (it was messages like "let's do a non French vote" and stuff like this that worried me). Nevertheless you can even look at it. Markadet fr 10:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Cartero devil (or the other way around!:D), and thank you for the support on my recent RfA. The final tally was 72/1/0, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I'll be tentative with the new buttons for a while, and certainly welcome any and all feedback on how I might be able to use them to help the project. All the best, and thanks again! — Deville (Talk) 01:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I I feel truly humbled & honored by your support in my RfA, which closed at 90 / 5 / 0. Thank you! If you need me for anything, just say the word. For now however, just like Mr Potter here:
hi there... i'm not sure if you remember, but you deleted this article (lonelygirl15) fairly recently. There's now quite a contentious discussion going on on the talk page, the gist of which is a tension between the argument that since some further references in more reputable sources she deserves an article, with people who feel she's a flash in the pan. I guess as the deleting admin you may become involved, so i thought i'd let you know - perhaps you'd like to take a look at it all? - cheers, Petesmiles 12:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
This article has an AFD tag that points to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenda Dvorkin which you closed as a delete recently - however, it is a different article, that may, or may not, be affected by that AFD. Your call - keep, delete, or relist - but one way or another the tag should go. Here's one of those complex issues where I'm glad I'm not an AFD closing admin. :-). AnonEMouse(squeak) 19:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I see you closed this AfD and deleted the article. However, I and other voters suggested it be protected against re-creation as well. The author's page already is protected, and since this article has just been created and deleted for at least its third time, I think it might be prudent. -Elmer Clark 20:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the (very!) prompt response :) -Elmer Clark 20:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your support on my RFA, which closed successfully this morning with a result of (64/3/3). I will be stepping lightly at first trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! NawlinWiki 11:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC) talkcontribs
Why was this page deleted? I am a translator currently working on a french version of this title and use this page as a source of information on my website. I do not understand the reason for deletion, wikipedia is supposed to be a source of information and this title qualifies for that.
({{User:MauricedePont]]]]
In 2005, you had requested the deletion of the Cheema article. I would just like to say the article is not actually a hoax, thanks to this article I was able to pass my assignment on various various tribes of the subcontinent. The information, which was in this article was very valuable and hard to come by unless if you know Punjabi or owned some translated works. Anyway just giving you a heads up that its not actually a fake article as you erroneously stated. Please next time take some time before you indiscriminately link articles up for deletion.
I am confused as to why this shouldn't be recorded as keep instead of no consensus. Could you explain, or point me at a document that explains this scoring?
During my first year contributing to the wikipedia most of my articles were on non-controversial topics, like nautical history, nautical fiction, Arctic exploration. During my second year contributing to the wikipedia I have contributed to articles on controbersial topics; I have started articles on controversial topics, particularly articles related to the war on terror.
Approximately two dozen of the articles I have started on war on terror related topics have been nominated for deletion. Over a dozen of those were articles about Guantanamo detainees. This most recent nomination is not the only one where the keep votes were a clear majority, for which the adminstrator who closed the discussion recorded the result as no consensus.
Very unfortunately some of the nominators, and many of the voters in these {afd} have clearly stated that they were basing their nomination or their vote on their personal partisan politics -- not on wikipedia policies and procedures.
This last nomination was described, by the nominator, as a test case, which, if it succeeded, would start the deletion of a large subset of the Guantanamo detainee articles. Previous nominators have announced that it was their intention, if their nomination succeeded, to delete all the articles about Guantanamo detainees.
I am afraid I have to anticipate that there will be further attempts to nominate more Guanatanamo detainee article for deletion by wikipedia contributors who want to delete all the articles. The last two serious nominators, who weren't sockpuppets,
Rather than rushing to try correct the misconceptions of the nominators, and to respond to the comments of those convinced by their arguments for deletion, which are very similar from nomination to nomination, I want to create a fact sheet in advance. And, on that fact sheet I would like to state the number of Guantanamo article that had been nominated for deletion, the number deleted (1), and the number of nominations that resulted in a keep result. If my understanding of the vote scoring is correct, and the result of this nomination should have been recorded as keep -- not no consensus, I think it would be very useful if the official recorded as keep.
If my understanding of the vote scoring is correct could you see your way clear to correcting the official record? You will have my thanks if you can do this.
If I go through the records of the earlier nominations, and find the other instances where over 50% of the votes were cast as keep, do you think there would be any way for the official record of those results to be corrected? What contacting the administrator who closed the discussion be the right path? What if that administrator is no longer participating in the wikipedia, or is no longer an administrator?
If keep clearly has more votes cast for it than merge or delete, but it didn't get more than 50% of the votes, does the policy say that should be a no consensus?
Thanks. Cheers! -- Geo Swan 23:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I left a note on User Talk:JIP asking him or her to look at the note I left you, and asking them if they too might consider helping me figure out whether I am missing something. -- Geo Swan 00:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Fyi, I removed the AfD tag from the Wolfgang Abendroth article, which was co-nominated in the above AfD. Best, trialsanderrors 07:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Mailer, you recently closed Gregory Joseph Gould I as delete. There was a second page nominated for deletion in that AfD. It was Gregory Joseph Gould II. Can you please delete that page too? Thanks. -- cmh 13:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind me restoring the Negrophobia redirect (and just the redirect). I have a certain fear of useful redirects being deleted because someone vandalizes it or turns it into something else. Additionally, AfD crowds can't necessarily be trusted with looking into article histories. CanadianCaesarEt tu, Brute? 04:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, did you just delete the above article? It seems its been recreated as a redirect to a non existent article -- Lost(talk) 13:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I am a bit confused though. It only seems to have been deleted once according to the log, which is now. There were quite a few contributors to the original article (including me, reverting the afd tag etc), but while it was a redirect, only one contributor's name could be seen? How is that possible? -- Lost(talk) 13:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Aah... I get it. Thanks -- Lost(talk) 13:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your support of my RfA, which has passed with a final tally of 76/1/1. With this overwhelming show of support and approval I am honored to serve Wikipedia in the task charged to me and as outlined in my nomination. Happy editing to you! Teke (talk) 17:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind support on my recent Request for Adminship. I've looked up to editors such as yourself for a while now, and your !vote means more to me than you might tink. Of course, my request was ultimately unsuccessful - which wasn't entirely surprising - and so I'll be taking special care to address the concerns raised by the opposing !voters before running again. If you have any feedback for me, please don't hesitate to leave it at my talk page. Thanks!
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Neely Fuller Jr.. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. GRBerry 19:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)}
Carnildo 3, commet after my comment after an oppose[edit]
Yes, as you say, it's trust. And the rashness on that day does create concerns for the future. From what I can see a simple, "I meant well but I acted wrongly," would have gone a long way to undo some of the harm. I can't fathom it. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Woo-hoo! You forgot to read the instructions! :o) Just zis Guy you know? 17:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Mailer_diablo, thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which was closed as successful today with a finaly tally of (56/0/3). I will be very careful at first to avoid any mistakes. Please feel free to leave a message in my talk page if you have any comments/suggestions about me in the future. Once again, thank you! --WinHunter(talk) 09:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Mailer Diablo, for your support at my RfA, which finished with a tally of 94/1/0. I hope I live up to the confidence you have shown in me in my activities as an administrator. JPD (talk) 15:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the idea of deleting the image which has the sole purpose of going with an article that's been properly deleted by AfD. Was scrounging around to find the image again so I could list it on IfD, but the work's already been done, good job. Kevin_b_er 20:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words on closing this AfD - they were appreciated. Dlyons493Talk 10:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Closing AfD and removal of the category template[edit]
Mailer...
With the new categories set up for deletion, a template is added to the top of each AfD entry. This allows for the sorting of AfD by topic. When closing a discussion, the template needs to be removed to allow for it to drop from the category. The tag says, {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}. I went and removed the tag from the following entries you closed as I was already watching the discussion. Your attention to removing this when you close discussions would be greatly appreiaciated. Thanks.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maidstone Wrestling Association
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historical fiction short story
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Militaristic Regime Change and Militaristic Democratization Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Native Americans and the Palestinians: A shared struggle for nationhood
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bottie Wrestling.
Hi Master diablo, I found your page because I was reading on Wikitruth about how you ended the deletion debate. I don't really care about that though, I was just curious about something. Do you go by Master diablo or Master Diablo? I see the D capitalized in your and others' references to you, but it is lower-cased here. Why not just chance it to match the capital one? Also, what are people talking about your 'b' and the meaning of it? I see no 'b' or 'B' in your profile, signature and whatnot. Also, did you play Diablo and Diablo II when it came out? What would your stance be on the deletion of my amazing Diablo III article despite the demand of many others besides me to bring it back? I think it definately deserves it, we have articles on Futurology after all. Tyciol 19:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about the IRL issues, the Deletion Project is a great idea (always pleased to see number crunching on wiki; it's a tremendous opportunity to gather data) and sorry for not complying with the header as I have a tendency to be dense -- Samirधर्म 09:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
It is really great to be back. Thank you so much for the nice note. Hey, don't stay away for too long, ya hear? - Lucky 6.9 18:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Just as a further comment requesting the applicationo fhte category template, "Oh yes, if don't mind, could you add the cat just after the header of the AfD (instead of the top)? " I am not placing the tag on the discussion, it is now an automatic process when the discussion is created. I have been correcting the the catagory tag within the template, but I am not adding them. I was never part of the discussion about adding the tags, I just came across it one day and started using it and cleaning up. The official policy is at WP:AFDC.--Gay Cdn(talk)(email)(Contr.) 11:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your actually proper handling of AfD: Nicola Tappenden (for the 4th gorram time). I was really pissed off that my last AfD, which also called for the protection of the article, was summarily ignored by some other admin. EVula 17:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey. As the nominator of the article, I noticed that when you closed the AfD discussion, you didn't do anything to the other article I nominated along with it, Super Cosplay Wars Ultra (it's basically the same article as the one that was deleted). Just wondering why that happened. —NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 17:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I was not assuming bad faith. I had made a perfectly sensible and widely approved of block, and Nick came in and demanded it be overturned without doing the slightest bit of research. It was only after having to put up with three increasingly confrontational posts, and as it became clear that he really hadn't looked into the situation at all before demanding an unblock, that I questioned his competence. This is something I stand by entirely, considering that he has behaved similarly in the past. Rebecca 01:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you so much for supporting my RfA! It ended up passing and I'm rather humbled by the support (and a bit surprised that it was snowballed a day early!). Please let me know if I can help you out and I welcome any comments, questions, or advice you wish to share.
