Jump to content

User talk:DragonflySixtyseven

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ltblood (talk | contribs) at 00:05, 1 October 2016 (→Need review: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

IMPORTANT NOTE: ADD YOUR MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM, NOT THE TOP. OTHERWISE I MIGHT NOT SEE THEM.

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

Thank You

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
message Leedslover1922 (talk) 23:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A token of gratitude for your tireless work . Helped me a lot .

tɕɤpʰɯ

A little help here, please. I attempted to create the page tɕɤpʰɯ as a redirect to Japhug language. I get an error that says "The page title or edit you have tried to create has been restricted to administrators at this time. It matches an entry on the local or global blacklists, which is usually used to prevent vandalism." It seems hard to believe that tɕɤpʰɯ would ever have been placed on a blacklist but who am I to judge? Anyway, I think the redirect to Japhug language is legit, so could you please create the page as an admin? Thanks. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 19:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ashrafi Esfahani (cropped).jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ashrafi Esfahani (cropped).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rollie Free, record run.jpg

Hi Dragonfly, your edit adding the photographer source for the above file just popped up on my watchlist. Fantastic and well done. May I ask where you managed to source this info from? Mainly because I drew a blank on who the original photgrapher was when I first uploaded the image way back many moons ago and I'd be interested to know.

Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found it here, while rummaging through Getty Images on an unrelated project. DS (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info, and thanks for updating the image file. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:58, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dream 1989.jpg listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect File:Dream 1989.jpg. Since you had some involvement with the File:Dream 1989.jpg redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mlpearc (open channel) 05:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for participating

Logo of Women in Red
Thank you for your participation in the Women in Science Virtual Edit-a-thon, 8 to 29 November 2015, hosted by Women in Red together with Women scientists. It was held in parallel with a meet up at the New York Academy of Sciences on 22 November. In addition to improvements, we created well over 300 new articles. Your contributions are appreciated!

Hope you will also join us for the WiR Women in Religion Virtual Edit-a-thon from 5 to 15 December.--Ipigott (talk) 11:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you patrol me?

You patrolled my user page Wollmersdorfer and left a cryptic message. Sockpuppet? Delete me? Please state clear what you critisize and what I should do in your opinion. I have this account for years as well as the accounts on other wikipedias with the same name, my real name. Maybe during the user unification something was damaged by the admins (rename to Wollmersdorfer~enwiki) but they left it unrepaired. --Wollmersdorfer (talk) 06:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion nomination of File:Humbert1.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Humbert1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gravity.jpg

Could you provide a valid rationale for deletion? "Image not used by any page" is not a valid rationale for deletion unless it is unfree and has been tagged with {{di-orphaned fair use}} for at least one week. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"A valid speedy deletion rationale is also needed for File:Freda Dudley Ward.jpg. "Better quality" is not a valid reason for F8 deletion; it has to be an identical file (or of lower resolution). "

What do you think "better quality" means, if not "kept image of higher resolution, deleted image of lower resolution" ? Because that's what it means when I use it.

As for the others — ... be serious. Process is important, but it's not all-important. Remember, ignore all rules. I'm an admin because of, among other things, my judgment. Let me exercise it. I look at an image, and who uploaded it, and what else they've done, and what information they provided about the image, and how the image was used at the time. There are loads of unused images that I let stand if there's any conceivable use for them. The ones I delete are garbage images. Low-resolution blurry smears, incomprehensible diagrams intended to illustrate vanity spam articles that were deleted in 2005, scanned-in photocopies with no description. If there's any doubt about an image, I leave it untouched.

If you think I deleted an image by mistake, I'm willing to talk about that. But if you want me to restore a garbage image, just so that it can then be re-deleted as the subject of a Full And Proper Deletion Debate In Accordance With Procedure, you are wrong. DS (talk) 19:31, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If there are valid reasons for deletion, then please amend the deletion rationales so that users can determine if the files were correctly deleted or not. As it currently stands, the deletion rationales contain no indication that the files satisfied a speedy deletion criterion in the first place. When files are deleted, sensible deletion rationales should be used so that users who look at the deletion logs aren't puzzled. Also, if File:Freda Dudley Ward.jpg really were a lower resolution copy of the file on Commons (with no other differences), then I'm not sure why I added {{ShadowsCommons}} instead of {{NowCommons}} in the first place. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:18, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:GCM.png

A tag has been placed on File:GCM.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:56, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Football ground.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Football ground.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 16:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Pup1.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Pup1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 14:51, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Perri.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Perri.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. BethNaught (talk) 22:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Peabody.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:Peabody.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. BethNaught (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{ShadowsCommons}}

When you rename a file which shadows Commons, can you please ensure you complete the following steps:

  1. rename the file
  2. update file links
  3. remove the {{ShadowsCommons}} template
  4. delete the redirect.

The reason you have received several CSD notices is that you did not delete the redirects. Not deleting the redirects prevents the use of the Commons image, which is after all the point of renaming the image. Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 22:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
A barnstar for you, in thanks for your willingness to drop everything and help me get something time-sensitive fixed. You went above and beyond what I had hoped for when I asked for help, and I truly appreciate it! Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 16:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Request to consider modification of recent protecting of Webster University Thailand page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_University_Thailand

hello

you recently protected a page for this university.

please look at the links provided, the information is overwhelming and some type of critism section must exist because their have people who have both died and had their families threatened while attending this school

if you could add this following comment somethere to the page and then leave it protected it could very well save lives, please just look at the links and consider the gravity of this situation.

thank you

_____________________________________

Webster University Thailand has been the subject of ongoing public speculation and scrutiny over the practices of its administration and director in both the media and in lawsuits over the safety standards and maltreatment of students.


Webster University itself has acknowledged its failures in this campus through an internal review citing "dozens of significant trouble areas for the school, ranging from facilities overrun by pests to a toxic culture where students commonly believe their administrators are crooks."


__________________________________________________________________

What you are doing is known as Edit warring. If you have a concern about the article, you need to discuss the article on the talk page. Frankly, it's surprising you're not blocked for this edit war. Cheers, —GFOLEY FOUR!— 22:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that assessment. Trying emotional blackmail will not help. What you wrote is a hit piece, with the most prominent claims of abuse based on a highly dubious source, the College Times article, plus a paragraph of serious allegations of misconduct cited to Wikipedia itself. There are blatant WP:BLP issues with the text you wrote. Just having the page protected, instead of blocking you, is rather generous of DragonflySixtySeven, and likely due to them only stopping the edit war without looking into the merits of the edits. Huon (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look through all four links, that college times article has been thoroughly vetted although some of the conclusions reached I do not agree with, all of the information backing it is authentic. The Bangkok Post article was released to the national press, the internal memo from webster is damning and the insighthigered article details not only reinforces what has been said but goes into significant detail about the high turnover rate of professors and the unethical business practices.

Fair enough that I should have been more restrained in what i wrote but how do you expect to react when you know the people who have been threatened? Something needs to be put up on that page for the safety and wellbeing of the students and needs to stay up, this is not intended to be a hit piece but to save peoples lives and something, anything, linking to those articles has to be on the wiki page.

please take due consideration in this matter and do the right thing. Thank you. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling Overview of spanish-speaking podcasts

Dear DragonflySixtyseven,

I was notified that you patrolled my draft page "Overview of spanish-speaking podcasts" [1].

Since I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, what does this precisely mean?

Thankfully,

~ Robert

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Orschiro/Overview_of_spanish-speaking_podcasts

Uamaol has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

For helping me out and generally being awesome, here's a cookie :) Uamaol (talk) 21:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

File:Deja Vu (Beyoncé song - sample).ogg

When moving a sound file, also move the corresponding subtitles (if any). TimedText:Deja Vu (Beyoncé song - sample).ogg.en.srt was under the old file name until I discovered the error today, and this means that the subtitles have been missing for over a year and a half. Unfortunately, Special:MovePage doesn't warn you if there are subtitles which need to be moved, so I'm not sure how to discover this. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Cfsformations

You blocked this account quite some time ago (quite rightly, as it's a company username and their user page was promotional), but now the account operator has said that the account is for a single user and that they will not write about their company, and has suggested a compliant and transparent username (of the form "person at company"). So would you object if I unblock so they can request a name change? I'd keep an eye on their contributions for a little while. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:43, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bondage gear listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bondage gear. Since you had some involvement with the Bondage gear redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. sst✈(discuss) 09:19, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Howard Barnes

Let's see. Did you block User:Andrew Howard Barnes because they are impersonating a real person and are not him? In that case, the draft biography is not an autobiography at all, and I will MFD it. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 'impersonating' is a bit strong. "Didn't realize that you're not supposed to use someone's name when writing about them", more like; I guided the user through requesting a namechange, and am about to try showing them how to make their content more acceptable. DS (talk) 02:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are they in favor of him or against him? Just curious. The biography is reasonably neutral and does not look nearly as promotional as most real autobiographies. Maybe I may decide not to MFD it, but just to comment that it isn't a real autobiography. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:18, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Star Wars science fair

Please un-delete Star Wars science fair as there was no consensus in deleting it. If you're wondering which article I'm talking about it's here [1]. It has a number of reliable sources and sufficient coverage which I pointed out in the talk page. Thank you--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi Nadirali. You might want to review Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria. The sources you posted seem to be mainly library sites proving the book exists rather than anything establishing notability. The two actual reviews you posted seem to be personal blogs rather than notable review sites. Anomie⚔ 20:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There were also sources covering the subject that I posted on the talk page. And no, goodreads is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia and it's not a blog to my understanding. I don't use blogs as sources in compliance with WP policy. If you feel it does not meet WP:GNG, undelete it and open a nomination so consensus can be established. There you can explain your reasons why you feel it does not meet general notability. This happened with another previous article I created, also currently a stub, where an admin deleted it. When I requested an un-deletion and nomination, the consensus was keep with voters pointing to small, but reliable sources. If you still wish to delete it, you can un-delete and nominate it explaining your reason. I even provided coverage for this topic on the talk page including text and video coverage. If you un-deleted it, people would see and form a consensus.--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 22:20, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you seriously claiming that Goodreads is a reliable source in terms of notability? It's not. Your sources were WorldCat (proving that the book exists), the Queens NY Public Library Catalog (likewise), and a personal blog. Your external links were Goodreads (as mentioned above), and a page on Planet Science that doesn't even mention the book. The stuff you mentioned on the talk page is similarly useless: it's available via Google Books (again, proving that the book exists), and then there's blogs and library catalogs. And... that's it. Even all those videos you dug up - those are about the experiments, not the book. I'm not claiming that this book is not notable, I'm saying that so far, you have not shown that it is. There's no evidence. None of the evidence you supplied is valid. If you want it restored, show me real evidence. Okay? DS (talk) 23:50, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the draft

Thanks for the draft. To inform you, I won't be working on that for a few weeks since I'll be busy expanding other Star Wars pages, but this article is still on my agenda, so in case you wonder why it's not been edited in a while. Regards.--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 23:24, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Grupo Sura

I was about to start writing an article on Grupo Sura but I noticed a box stating that an article previously named the same was deleted by you. Just wanted to get the green light from you so I can go ahead an add the article. Thank you. Anfecaro (talk) 22:56, 27 December 2015 (EST)

Happy New Year DragonflySixtyseven!

Happy New Year!

DragonflySixtyseven,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 18:08, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages.

Dear DS,
Thank you once again for all your helpful assistance, and for everything else that you do in support of our encyclopedia.
I wish you a great New Year in 2016!
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 18:08, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jèrriais 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:
  • Influential writers include "Laelius" (Sir [[Robert Pipon Marett]] 1820 – 1884, [[Bailiff (Channel Islands)|] of Jersey 1880 – 1884), "A.A.L.G." ([[Augustus Aspley Le

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Subiksha (actress)

  • Sir i am disappointed as the page of subiksha was deleted by you. the page had valid references and it really matched notability standard. So i request you to restore the same page. George Mohan George Mohan 08:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, it didn't, and it didn't. You can create a fresh version if you can come up with sources that are actually about Subiksha, instead of just mentioning her name. DS (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallerworld

Hey Dragonfly. Just wondering why you removed Hallerworld's talk page access? They don't appear to have posted there since being blocked, and weren't being disruptive there beforehand. Sam Walton (talk) 10:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misclick. If you want to change the parameters for the block, go ahead. DS (talk) 14:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and request to reload on The American School Foundation of Guadalajara, A.C.

Hello DragonflySixtyseven,

I am the Director of Development of the American School Foundation of Guadalajara (you may check this at our site www.asfg.mx) and worked last year with our staff on the article you deleted. All information is correct as it was taken from publications that were cited and our own web site. Our logo which is copyrighted by us was also deleted by you. Can you please explain what is the procedure to unpload the article you deleted? Can it be retrieved? Thanks for your guidance and help Respectfully, Claudia Claudia Grossi (talk) 16:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uninvolved admin opinion here (the deleting admin pinged me to look at it).
I took a look at the deleted material and logo-licensing issues. The logo is an easy case: if you claim it's not freely licensed (which is a reasonable situation), it is allowed to be present in the article as a non-free/fair-use exception. But it is allowed to be on Wikipedia at all if and only if it is in-use in that sort of scenario. As to the article itself, prior to your edits, it was a moderately neutral (WP:NPOV compliant) albeit mostly uncited short article. You added a ton of uncited claims (making the WP:V problem that has existed for 9 years much worse) and much of it was promotional in content and/or tone (not valid for our encyclopedia, but not uncommon for editors writing about their own topics). I have thus undeleted the article (which makes the logo file legitimate) but undone your edits. The school itself probably can have an article, being of high-school-level, but the article we currently have does indeed need substantial work to bring it into compliance with our policies and guidelines. DMacks (talk) 18:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This made me laugh

[2] Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:10, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vision statements

I see you've been removing some of the worst of them. I always meant to do that, but didn't want to start in on my own; Now I see your good example, I will follow it. DGG ( talk ) 19:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling

Hi, I noticed that you "patrolled" my user page. I'm just curious about what that entails. I've been on Wikipedia as an editor for over a decade, but I've only recently become active again, so I'm having to play catch up, learning the culture and practices. Thanks in advance. Tim D. Williamsonyakkety-yak 01:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I had no idea new user pages were checked like article namespace pages were. I appreciate that you linked to the page on patrolling. Tim D. Williamsonyakkety-yak 02:33, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of Catholic titular sees

The article List of Catholic titular sees has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Duplicates content of Alphabetical List of Catholic titular sees

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Elizium23 (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Guanín (Taíno)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Guanín (Taíno) —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Anomalocaris (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers *clink* to your user page

I have no idea what it means that you reviewed and patrolled my page, but in trying to find out what this means, I discovered the user, talk, discusssion (and other sub-pages) I created just as a quick start - are not found.  :-(

JoySLeigh JoySLeigh (talk) 23:35, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Writer's Barnstar
I think it is SUPER cool that you have written several articles. It could, maybe, inspire others! Ilovebeaniebabies8804! (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletion

Hi, thanks for your reply here. Would it be possible to keep any of the pages up for deletion? The only 2 I have in mind are a and b. Reason I ask is because these 2 have a lot of archival information in their previous revisions. Also, can you give me the exact date when the mass deletion is to occur? JayJ47 (talk) 03:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLove

Zppix has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Sorry for the trouble I put you through! Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 21:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Richard and Preston Patrick

Hallo, I find that you deleted articles on these two Cumbria parishes on 13 November 2011, as "article created by banned user in violation of ban" (see here - I've lost the corresponding info for PP but am pretty sure it was your name and didn't note the date). I've just created a new article for Preston Patrick, but before I start on another for Preston Richard, could you let me have copies of the deleted versions so I can see if there is any useful content to use? Thanks. PamD 09:02, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anwar Agewan

You deleted Anwar Agewan citing that the article do not pass general notability criteria but he is Gujarati language Author, biographer and editor. There may be problem with references but you should tag it with refimprove rather than deleting it. I was not even given a chance to defend the deletion. At least you should put it for discussion. The site you mentioned as Mirror site is not actually a mirror site but the site is owned by Gujarati Sahitya Parishad which donated their short biographies of Authors to Gujarati Wikipedia. The article was translation of the Gujarati article citing GSP as its source. May be more refs can be found and edited but please restore the article as he is important literary person in Gujarati language. Ping me if any questions. Regards, -Nizil (talk) 09:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DS67 asked me to reply, at the moment, undeleting the article isn't an option, due to the lack of sources. We don't allow new biographies which lack reliable sources and discourage any new articles which lack reliable sources. If we're to undelete/restore the article, because the article could have an impact on any living relatives, we would need you to provide us some sources first and when we're able to confirm they're not just mirrors of the Gujarati Wikipedia, we can undelete the article for you to continue editing. Nick (talk) 20:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nick I am giving some English refs. Here he is cited as a columnist:[3], his death where he is adressed as wellknown Gujarati journalist:[4] And two of his books on Google Books: [5]. VIAF: [6] -Nizil (talk) 21:04, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy blank

Hi DragonflySixtyseven. I saw that you courtesy blanked Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rory Emerald and am just curious why. I think it might somehow be related to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Rory Emerald page. A new article Rory emerald has been created, but has been tagged for speedy per WP:G4. Finally, I've never seen a courtesy blank of an AfD discussion before; I understand the principle behind it, but was wondering why you chose to use {{courtesy blanked}} instead of {{xfd-privacy}} as instructed at WP:CBLANK since it was an AfD discussion. Is there some reason the "xfd-privacy" template shouldn't be used in this particular case? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:58, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#sukhumcity.ru

add \bsukhumcity\.ru\b on MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist links sites. 50.96.56.148 (talk) 15:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need a reason. DS (talk) 16:13, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Editing users. 2A01:5F20:0:0:0:0:0:24 (talk) 06:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fenwick User Page

Hi DragonflySixtyseven. I noticed that you have patrolled and deleted my page. Please can you be more specific as to the inappropriate use? Can you please also explain to me, why my article - which was not even published got removed? The page was only in "sandbox" mode and not officially published yet. I thought this was the whole idea of the sandbox mode - to correct things before they are published. Please correct me if I am mistaken. Thanks. mcflyza (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the feedback and explanation. I was just reading up again on the section of notability and I can say that for the previous page I created in 2014, I indeed attempted to show notability, by supplying references to the website on which the newspaper article had been published, yet that did not seem to be sufficient evidence, so it is a little confusing as to what is "sufficient enough" to be considered notable. The irony is that I could point out to you other companies in the same business line that have successfully published a wiki article similar to the ones I attempted to post - but that's not what I am here for, because if you patrol them, it will be my fault. Unfair, I know, but their good luck I suppose. Thanks.

mcflyza (talk) 15:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Why can't I have a substandard page? Those other substandard pages misled me into thinking your standards were lower!" "Oops, you're right! Tell us where those substandard pages are, and we'll remove them!" "NOOOO! DON'T REMOVE THEM! IF YOU REMOVE THEM, IT'LL BE MY FAULT!!!!" How can we show that our standards are higher if people like you don't let us know where the substandard stuff is? DS (talk) 14:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't misunderstand me. I never, at any time said those other page were substandard. I said that I have come across pages like mine, which seem to be low on "notability". I asked for a little feedback, such as what is considered sufficient enough feedback, but did not get any. For example, the reference originally came from an external source (a newspaper article), but published on the company website, for some reason was not considered sufficient enough. I'm trying to understand what is acceptable and sufficient enough to sustain a page on Wiki, because even referencing an external article doesn't seem to be sufficient. There is no reason to get sarcastic or hostile.

mcflyza (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gadget Flow

Hey mate, I went through the whole thing with HUON and he finally approved it :) He told me to message you in order to get this published -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Gadget_Flow I really appreciate all the help, enjoy your day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xqlusivevan (talk • contribs) 19:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't approve anything; I advised you to submit it for another review. Huon (talk) 20:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Datuk Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Datuk Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim. Since you had some involvement with the Datuk Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 04:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Toussaint Merle

Hi DragonflySixtyseven,

And thank you for having taken the time to review this newly created article of mine. Just, I was wondering: like all the articles I create on the en Wiki, this one is a direct translation from the French original and nobody ever corrects the mistakes that are included in the text (style, syntax, vocabulary etc.). Maybe they are flawless after all but this I can't believe. Is there a policy on this version of Wikipedia to be very lax and tolerant re. the articles created by non-native English speakers? LouisAlain (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC) (fiftytwo)[reply]

Your review on my X-Men custom userbox

Kumusta (Hello) DragonflySixtyseven! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nin-5H (talk • contribs) 15:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving a review on one of my custom userboxes. Let me know if you are interested because I'll make more userboxes for everybody. :-) --Aki (talk) (contributions) April 25 2016, 11:02 P.M. (PST)

Orphaned non-free image File:Petula Clark holding Harry Belafonte's arm (1968).jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Petula Clark holding Harry Belafonte's arm (1968).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Petula Clark holding Harry Belafonte's arm (1968).jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Petula Clark holding Harry Belafonte's arm (1968).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. George Ho (talk) 18:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dulce et decorum est/Pro patria Casey. (Irrelevant friendliness, no fear!)

Random editor here who has been trying to look at userpages of frequently appearing Wikipedia cast members during a recent spate of dull conference calls, and I have to comment that, as a nearly-45-year-old who, since about the 15th year of said terrestrial tenure, has felt that being able to rattle off memorized poems was a party trick worth having, you invoked in a remarkably economical number of words two of the first of said "party tricks" that ever entered my repertoire before I was even of driving age. Yay, DragonflySixtyseven! (I am so sad for the loss of your loved one and have no better words for that apart from another deeply loved "party trick," Frost's "Fire and Ice," which doesn't fit but it's what I can do at the moment.) If you don't know Wallace Stevens' "Anecdote of the Jar", it is my current favorite, maybe just 'coz my late dad was from Tennessee, whether or not he ever placed a jar upon a hill there. My very best. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom Scientific (part II)

Hello, just a heads up re this conversation, the article's been re-created by Patricktimony (who I've met personally in Washington). At least the new version has outside sorces; I've tweaked it a bit and made the older versions available to non-admins, but I feel too close to the subject to do much else. Graham87 10:17, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About if SLOC including comment lines

about if SLOC including comment lines 。

It 'is a disputed, I think it no edit-war. please talk with me !

please see http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.413.4352&rep=rep1&type=pdf

see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Source_lines_of_code&oldid=672185307

see http://www.projectcodemeter.com/cost_estimation/help/GL_sloc.htm

see Emacs SLOC, is including comment lines!

see https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOC they count lines, too including comment lines.


please write two points double appear on web. my english is poor. no edit war, no the dictatorship； to Coexistence！ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yzyzyz1979 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'm not 100% sure what you mean -- and although you're obviously asking about the source lines of code article, I don't really understand that topic either. Sorry, try asking someone else? DS (talk) 12:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex and/or Mr. Morrison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extraterrestrial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

freemartin

my apologies if i am posting this in error in attempt to write back on your edit reversion

appreciate your comments on the edit to the freemartin/twin female calf page. will edit that to try and produce a coherent statement

"a subjective assessment is that frequently the hair at the ventral tip of the vulva forms a tuft in a freemartin heifer."

perhaps " frequently freemartin heifers have at the tip of ventral tip of their vulva a tuft of hair which is distinctive in these individuals, albeit a subjective assessment"


i write this because i am a veterinary surgeon specializing in cattle reproduction and see these cases often in practice, as well as the literature on them. thank you. jh - vmd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acornembryo (talk • contribs) 00:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

fully protected template

Hi! I've been going through fully-protected templates to see if they may be good candidates to request a lower protection level to allow template editors to edit them. I noticed you fully-protected Template:Whydidyoudothat a while back as a "private" template. The template namespace is usually collaborative, similar to the mainspace. Would you consider moving this page into your userspace? You would still be able to link to it and substitute it just like normal. If you moved it to User:DragonflySixtyseven/Whydidyoudothat, then you could type {{subst:User:DragonflySixtyseven/Whydidyoudothat}} to substitute it on any page. ~ RobTalk 21:42, 3 June 2016 (UTC) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[reply]

Thank you for reviewing my draft of "Leatrice Rose", DragonflySixtyseven. I would like to upload a photo of a painting by this artist. The painting is in the possession of a family member of Leatrice Rose, and I have permission of the family member to upload the photo to the w page. May I upload the photo?. 2. I am related to the artist. My article will be objective and referenced. Jayne3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayne3 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Drowning.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Drowning.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

{{center|1=''{{db-redircom}}''}}

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Stefan2 (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 13 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NPP / AfC

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Loon (monkey)

On 27 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Loon (monkey), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that diabetic children were sent to visit Loon, a drill at the San Diego Zoo, to help them overcome their aversion to needle injections? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Loon (monkey). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Loon (monkey)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:51, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there

Hi there, are you still active? If so, please delete my user and talk pages. I used to edit under User:EmilyREditor...thanks! 24.253.73.30 (talk) 21:12, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 10 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, DragonflySixtyseven. You have a message at Template:Did you know nominations/The Quickening Maze.
Message added 13:34, 11 July 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.

North America1000 13:34, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cassandra Parkin

I was shocked to discover that you simply deleted my page on Cassandra Parkin without even giving me any warning. I only realised what happened when I saw that a link to it on my user page led nowhere. Is this standard Wikipedia conduct? Though I'm sure you had good reason, briefly given as "notability not asserted", I worked hard on that page, so to see it tossed in the bin without having been allowed to plead its case, or even be aware that it was due for deletion, stuns me. It was not an offensive or irrelevant page, so I'm not sure why I've been treated so disdainfully here. Is there no way that my work can be restored, should I make a good enough case for its notability? --JackHeslop91 (talk) 09:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)Admins do have the authority to delete pages on sight in accordance with our speedy deletion policy. In this case, it looks like the page would fall under A7 since it arguably doesn't make a credible claim of significance. Internet fame for one review and publishing works that get reviews is run of the mill for many non-notable authors. The only thing that looks like it could be a claim of notability is the Scott Prize, but based on a Google News search, it does not seem to be a prize that gets much coverage, so the deletion is definitely not out of process. You can always start a userspace draft and demonstrate with reliable sources (i.e. not the self-published references from the author's own website + Amazon present in the original article) that the author would be notability as a way to potentially get it restored into mainspace eventually, or, depending on Dragonfly's response here, possibly take it to deletion review if (and only if) and agreement here is not reached.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining the policy to me. I'm still surprised I wasn't at the very least even told my page had been deleted. Is there any record of what I wrote so I can at least keep a hold of my work, should I wish to contest the deletion of the page and possibly have it restored? --JackHeslop91 (talk) 19:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Admin work with respect to user page review

Hi DragonflySixtyseven,

I got a notification of a user page review and got an explanation through the link on the header for editing pages.

The link to Template:Whydidyoudothat is broken and there is another link leading to User:DragonflySixtyseven/Whydidyoudothat.

You are probably aware of this.

Anyway, is there a means of marking a user page in such a way as to make your work easier? Please let me know.

If it doesn't exist already, some page having a stream of recommendations, policies and changes might be useful.

Kind regards,

--JamesPoulson (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review of common.js page

Curious about the purpose of your reviewing my common.js page.

Jasonanaggie (talk) 21:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasonanaggie: you should read User:DragonflySixtyseven/Whydidyoudothat as indicated at the top when editing this user page.--JamesPoulson (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of WP user, and his/her articles

Hi DragoflySixtyseven, I have been taken aback by the removal of a large number of articles made by User:Beetstraw. What the grounds for the user's blocking is, it seems to be sockpuppetting. However, I wonder what the reason is for removing their articles, as far as I could see they have full validity, they are good, and abiding by the article editing rules. Now that is a matter of concern for us, since the removal affects negatively a tournament taking place in the WP. Regards Iñaki LL (talk) 10:33, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DragonflySixtyseven:Good morning, I am bringing the comment from my user page. The removal of articles has sometimes entailed the removal of legitimate information, and rightful editors, such as this. I do not have access to the articles, but there may be more. Can you please reinstate it? Iñaki LL (talk) 07:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Iñaki LL: the articles, as much as the reason why they were created, stand as a trophy for this block evading and sockpuppeting editor. I strongly advice that these articles stay deleted, and at most independently recreated by other users writing their own content. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What? Did you ever read what I wrote? I have not stalked anyone, I started this section for legitimate reasons, and I kindly request this administrator to restore removal of content added / article created by an another editor, as he suggested. Thanks Iñaki LL (talk) 12:34, 16 July 2016S (UTC)
Yes, you started this for legitimate reasons, and I am not accusing you of stalking, I am the stalker here (click the link).
Your request is fine, but I strongly suggest not to restore the material, per WP:RBI and WP:DENY. Not only his score in the tournament, but also the content/articles that this editor has written are a trophy for them. That content is created in violation of our policies and guidelines. Did you see wat Drmies wrote? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I think we are talking to cross purposes. I have not reverted anything. Secondly, in the sweepingo removal made, an article created by another editor has been removed, so please restore it. By the way, my petition was to this contributor. Thanks Iñaki LL (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Iñaki LL:. The way I see it (if you are talking about Hercules fighting Nemean lion, Lyoko%C3%AF created an article on July 9. Beetstraw then created a duplicate article with some different content on the 11th and then wiped the earlier created article on the 12th, overwriting it with a redirect. The later article was deleted (by a checkuser, not DS). Unless you are talking about another article, I don't see content by other editors that was deleted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to it, by far most of the content was copied straight from an external website. And on none of the pages that Beetstraw created have significant edits by others. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, thanks. Could Lyoko's initial version be restored by chance? Iñaki LL (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Already done; glad to help. DS (talk) 22:59, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Iñaki LL (talk) 21:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletions

Can you help. I recently came across an article created by Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant which had been deleted. I tried to find out why and the reason given was "mass deletion" which explained what had happened ... but not why. I looked for a reason but I could not find one .... all I could find was the deleted article and other edits by other users (including me) which had also been deleted. I decided to reverse the deletion, but I wasn't happy that I had acted wisely only efficiently. I now see a new mass deletion where the reason is "mass deletion". Can you explain how I can find the reason for mass deletions? I have seen one reason given as "use of multiple accounts" but this may not effect the quality of articles at all. Thanks for your time. Victuallers (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Victuallers: creations, sometimes with wholesale copying of external texts and creating duplicate articles by socks of a blocked editor. The editor sees their creations, and prizes in competitions that they win with it as trophies. See WP:RBI and WP:DENY]]. I would suggest to keep the edits deleted, except if there are significant content contributions from others, and to write the articles from scratch. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:57, 16 July 2016 (UTC) Victuallers (reping). --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think for the page in question, there is significant work by others. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of these have been restored and there appears to be no evidence in the articles of why we/wiki might want them deleted. I think this mass deletion has caused Wikipedia to lose a lot of good conduct. I still cannot work out why you/we deleted the work. This is like burning the books of authors whose life styles are out of fashion. Can you please ensure that there is a link back to the reason why mass deletions are taking place in future. "Part of mass deletion" is not a reason. Other editors and admins want to know that articles are not being deleted as a punishment ...... as this is against the prime directive. Can you undelete these en masses as it is consuming a lot of time to do one by one? 16:13, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the comments, I did as you said., it helped me tighten things up. I'm still not finished yet and will come back to it when I return in the weeks to come. Have a peaceful day. My best.

Frr2391 (talk) 11:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Creating Pages based on Everyday changes

Hi there, I'm a South African in my teen years. I wanted to ask why are our Major Cities Changing While there pages don't. Johannesburg has upgraded a lot since 2010 nothing is said about that, We've Built Mall of Africa (MOA); everything on its page is based on opinion. Is it because we don't have many wikis in SA please Try Explaining This Issue For Mw Aphiwe778 (talk) 09:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure I understand your question. You — or anyone — can update articles based on media coverage. If you find articles with content based on opinion, you're free to correct that. DS (talk) 11:59, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I would greatly appreciate it if you kindly give me some feedback on my Draft

Hi DS, Thank you so much for your earlier suggestions. The last delete of SapphireOne was under G12 grounds, however admin said that it should have been deleted on advertisement grounds. Talk page where admin mentioned 'it should have been deleted on advertisement grounds' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JohnAdamsSapphireOne
SapphireOne - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SapphireOne
The last article that was deleted : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RbABC/sandbox

Now I am drafting SapphireOne. I would greatly appreciate it if you kindly give me some feedback on my Draft. Is it falling under advertisement , A7 or any grounds ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RbABC/testingABC

Thanks _RbABC (talk) 04:21, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi I don't know much about wikipedia but just wanted to say that though my article was deleted but still I liked your politeness. Rahul333bhoir (talk) 14:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dragonflysixtyseven, I would like to suggest a name for inclusion in your article on Rao Bahadur awards. Published in Her Majesty’s Stationery Office., "Venkataramana Raju P Rao Bahadur", The India Office and Burma List 1947 & 1945 ref :The India Office and Burma List 1947, Published : London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office – reference - https://books.google.co.in/books?id=oCUbAQAAIAAJ&q=p+venkatramana+raju&dq=p+venkatramana+raju&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj04e786oXOAhUOUI8KHU8jADYQ6AEIIDAB and one more reference :1985 "Eminent Indians Who was Who 1900-1980" Publisher :Durga Das Pvt. Ltd., 1985.New Delhi, Language: English, Dewey Number: 920/.054. Page 262 – reference - https://books.google.co.in/books?id=bLEZAAAAYAAJ&q=p+venkatramana+raju&dq=p+venkatramana+raju&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizkKOZ8YXOAhVFqo8KHZYeA4w4PBDoAQg5MAc

I would also appreciate your help in editing my article which is a work-in-progressRajendrarajun (talk) 13:41, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Universe

Hi, can you please change the Steven Universe List of Episodes page to my version please, which is the correct version? You locked it on the incorrect one. Thanks, Minecraft69 (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Minecraft69: No, in fact it is not, as I explained on the talk page. See also WP:THEWRONGVERSION. Protection is not an endorsement of either version. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Nyuszika7H: Almost every show out there has shorts, and none of them count them as an actual episode. They only count as a production code (1031-058), and by that logic the shorts should be 58 and ALL numbers after 58 should be changed. It's definitely not episode 79 though. Also remember that the staff work by production code, not aired episode number. Also, the episode numbers are the airing numbers, and the shorts never aired on TV, they're only internet shorts. Minecraft69 (talk) 22:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Minecraft69: Discuss that on the talk page, then. No administrator is going to revert to your preferred version without consensus. ~ Rob13Talk 01:39, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. DS67 locked in on the wrong one? ADMINABUSE. NeilN, I need you to get on it right now: full protection, restore the good version, block the wrong editor (I mean the one who was wrong, not the other one--they get a barnstar), and drag the admin off to ArbCom. This is an outrage. Drmies (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Drmies, you laugh, but... [7] --NeilN talk to me 15:19, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • You know, I was wondering the same thing myself--looking at these editors and seeing that none of them were blocked. But I think I get it: first, there's nothing more to be gained from a block. Second, it's so ridiculous that any continuation (as you noted on one of their talk pages) will result in a serious block. Third, blocking them will not solve the Real Life Problem of whether it was 79 or 80. As you may know, I'm always itching to block someone, anyone--though not as much as AlexTheWhovian--and I can feel that itch here too, two days after, but I can't fault DS67. I do understand, however, the desire to hear from them. Typically if I choose protection over a block I follow up with my Come To Jesus speech. It rarely works, but I feel it's traditional. Drmies (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, I like laughing. That was a ridiculous edit war. It's Monday. I have to go and teach in a minute. I'm still fat and old, and I need new glasses but can't afford them. I better be laughing. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You all are quite hilarious. Alex|The|Whovian? 22:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you for reviewing so many articles of me on South India. Regards and love, Prof TPMS (talk) 01:50, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of National Electrical Manufacturers Association

I'm sorry... where was the deletion discussion? I don't find it. Jeh (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


NEMA still exists as an organization, what needs to be done to undelete the wiki page? Luciusism (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review of material in sandboxes?

Hi... Just got a notice that you reviewed material on several of my sandbox pages. As I am new to their use I'd like to understand why. I thought sandboxes were private scratch space... I didn't think I'd have to work about an admin taking a look at what I had in process or notes I was making to myself. Clearly I was mistaken! Can you give me some info on the reality of this? RobP (talk) 21:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another cup of coffee for you!

Here's a cup of coffee for noticing that I'd made a few edits since vanishing in 2013 and saying hello. One two three... 08:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vox Day

DragonflySixtyseven: Please see the discussion on this addition here: User talk:David Gerard and respond on the article's talk page so I don't have to go through this again. I don't think you can call Chaos Horizon just a random blog. Kempner is quite the math geek and does quite good analyses. If you can't tolerate his blog as a reference, then I think you should remove the reference to John Scalzi's blog as well. Once you accept one "random" blog into an article, then you've opened the door to others. If I remove Chaos Horizon, then Day's support for The Three Body Problem remains, and the statistics are attached for anyone to do their own analysis. Pkeets (talk) 02:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'The' in title

'The' is part of the nomenclature of the laws Nagaland Liquor Total Prohibition Act, 1989 and Lakshadweep Prohibition Regulation, 1979 and should have been retained as per Wikipedia:Article titles. KhaasBanda (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy-deletion of National Electrical Manufacturers Association

You deleted it by CSD#A7, but it said "publishes more than 600 standards, application guides, white papers, and technical papers". I'm not sure that is actual notability, but it seems like an assertion of it. Want to take it to AFD? DMacks (talk) 13:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Waterboyy (2015 Thai movie)

Hi DragonflySixtyseven

Noticed that the page that i helped created and edited has been deleted, i hope that you could help to re-instate the page back, as this is a Thai movie, and from time to time, i will be doing some editing for the page. Hope to hear good news from youEvan Weinstein | Talk 15:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Waterboyy

First of all, let me start off by saying I've known about you for years, and am glad to see you're one of the few good editors and admins from 10 years ago who is somehow still here. That said, I'm a little concerned about your deletion of Waterboyy. Deleted because "notability not asserted." Problem is, films aren't really covered under that in Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. The article was a bit of a mess- I didn't write it, it did not appear to be written by someone whose first language is English. That said, there is WP:BIAS to consider. It follows there wouldn't be a lot of sources on the film in English, but it does appear to have made news- [8] WP:AFD would have been appropriate it you felt it were not notable. Ribbet32 (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of whether it's notable, it's a question of whether the article said anything to assert notability, which it didn't. Show me a list of sources (not a link to Google) and I'll restore it into your userspace. DS (talk) 11:40, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's Google News, not just Google. Ribbet32 (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Still a link to Google. Show me the actual news coverage. Doesn't have to be English as long as it fits through Google Translate or similar. DS (talk) 14:32, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I question your handling of this whole issue, including the misuse of WP:CSD and why you wouldn't bother with AfD or WP:PROD, but:

Ribbet32 (talk) 14:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good enough; I've restored it and moved it into your userspace, where I expect you will integrate content from those news sources before moving it back into mainspace! DS (talk) 15:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
New title is Water Boyy. Undelete talk page. Ribbet32 (talk) 23:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. DS (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, DragonflySixtyseven. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

possible vandalism

I reverted and edit of possible vandalism and I don't know what to do now here's the link to the article Dave Foley please check the page history and see if what I did was right. Ltblood (talk | contribs) 19:57, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

reviewing sandbox ?

wanna write the article Eliza Pittsinger‬ ? Almost the only biographical thing, I found was the SF Morning Call Obituary. She submitted a poem and it went viral.Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 00:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need review

Please Check this page it says Possible Vandalism and there is no undo button and I don't know what it says, heres the link kszm and if you click View History the tag says Possible vandalism. thanks Ltblood (talk | contribs) 00:05, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DragonflySixtyseven&oldid=741991725"